Cody Williams - 2024 NBA Draft Prospect

[timvp]

https://www.spurstalk.com/cody-williams-spurs-nba-draft/

[LeBowen]

The plot thickens!

According to today's reports Williams and Carter it is.

[Mugen]

I don't want him at #8, let alone #4 tbh :lol

[mo7888]

He's been #5 on my board for a while now, so that tracks with what we're hearing now..

[SpursFan86]

I don’t mind Williams at 8 but getting him at #4 is a little less exciting IMO. I mean I guess if the Spurs are truly super high on him then it’s not worth risking him not being there at 8, but if we passed up someone like a Sheppard/Castle I’d be a little bummed.

[CGD]

Man, TImvp must know something about Matas. Another snub lol

[Raven]

one of the better picks at #8 imo

[Mr. Body]

About as mid a player as you can get

[spurraider21]

would be an outcome at 8 i'd be content with. would be a bit rich at 4 though

[DPG21920]

Would be very happy to have him tbh and as I mentioned somewhere else on here I think a lot of people on ST are a bit too dismissive of Cody to the Spurs. Makes a lot of sense

[LeBowen]

He looks so smooth with the ball, but need a lot of work on his body and shot.
Would rather have him than Ignite guys or Salaun, tbh.

Drafting someone who can't help right away at #4 would be disappointing, though.

[Mr. Body]

Would be very happy to have him tbh and as I mentioned somewhere else on here I think a lot of people on ST are a bit too dismissive of Cody to the Spurs. Makes a lot of sense

Personally not dismissive. It's exactly the sort of pick they'd do. Just think in two years we'll forget he's even on the team even when he's playing twenty minutes a game.

He's just... nothing.

https://www.tankathon.com/players/cody-williams

Check out his last twelve games or so. He barely rebounds, a big effort stat. He is a wallflower. But he's a good kid! He's very polite.

[BatManu20]

Prob not as high on Williams as some on this board, but I wouldn't hate the pick either. He seems very Spursy between his position, high-character, coachability, etc. Just think it'd be a reach. His injury only allowed us to watch him play a few games too so it's a small sample size.

With that said, he'd be a pretty "meh" pick at 8 overall imo. He'd be an awful pick at 4. Just think there'll be better prospects in the top-8.

[DPG21920]

Personally not dismissive. It's exactly the sort of pick they'd do. Just think in two years we'll forget he's even on the team even when he's playing twenty minutes a game.

He's just... nothing.

https://www.tankathon.com/players/cody-williams

Check out his last twelve games or so. He barely rebounds, a big effort stat. He is a wallflower. But he's a good kid! He's very polite.

Sure and I am not in love with anyone this draft for the Spurs (other than Reed/Holland to some degree but even then in love is probably too strong) but Cody is one of the few guys if I squint enough that I can see a legitimate starting level cog on a really good team next to Wemby/Dev/Sochan.

[ulosturedge]

He plays too passive. Definitely not worth the 4th pick. I would take Holland over him at the 8th pick if we were going Wing on that pick.

[Raven]

He plays too passive. Definitely not worth the 4th pick. I would take Holland over him at the 8th pick if we were going Wing on that pick.

...... why?

[TD 21]

I had him pegged from the jump as the typical Spurs pick (other than the fact that he's more wing than guard).

I could see him being their second option (maybe third, if Sheppard is available) at 4 in the unlikely event Castle isn't available, but I would think he'd be more of an option at 8, especially in the event Salaun isn't available.


Sure and I am not in love with anyone this draft for the Spurs (other than Reed/Holland to some degree but even then in love is probably too strong) but Cody is one of the few guys if I squint enough that I can see a legitimate starting level cog on a really good team next to Wemby/Dev/Sochan.

The sad thing is Sochan isn't even close to fitting that description on any team, let alone the caliber you mentioned . . . and yet, you're right to include him because he's likely to be entrenched anyway.

[Mr. Body]

Sure and I am not in love with anyone this draft for the Spurs (other than Reed/Holland to some degree but even then in love is probably too strong) but Cody is one of the few guys if I squint enough that I can see a legitimate starting level cog on a really good team next to Wemby/Dev/Sochan.

When I say Cody is a nothing player, I mean it in the best way possible. Maybe I should say 'neutral,' lol. He's going to soak up minutes, not make many mistakes, and not do anything that will be an enormous positive. I don't see him as more than just a good platoon player who you won't worry about much but who won't win games for you. And fucking hell that rebounding. Just awful. I don't see any star potential except for a bare sliver of it. He was so passive and had no impact on games.

I get it, he was a freshman, but we have other players his age who actually tried and who mixed it up. It's just hard to be impressed by someone who barely tried.

[Eaglenole2002]

The handle definitely needs to tighten up. He said that was one of his main focuses during predraft workouts/training, and that it has tightened. I believe he said he’s up to 185, so he’s putting in some work there.

[TrainOfThought5]

Man, TImvp must know something about Matas. Another snub lol

CIATMVP tbh, where there’s smoke there’s fire :wakeup

[BackHome]

My only issue with him and Mantas as they both play to soft neither of them really likes or can handle contact

[ulosturedge]

...... why?

Why what? Why is he not worth the 4th pick?

[Mr. Body]

He's passive AND soft. What's not to love?

[Raven]

Why what? Why is he not worth the 4th pick?

why would you take holland over him

[SpursDynasty85]

He is so skinny. Looks more like a tall shooting guard than a true SF. He will need to gain at least 25 lbs of muscle to be a problem out there.

[spurraider21]

He's passive AND soft. What's not to love?
good scoring touch and finishing ability with the length that lets you believe that part of his game will translate. an already sound defender with tools to be a very good one, mainly needs to improve strength on that end

[ulosturedge]

why would you take holland over him

High motor guy and coachable(not that Williams isn't coachable), and good slasher to the basket. 3 point shot is questionable, but there is no evidence that Williams will be consistent there either. Williams doesn't look to take the shot. He defers alot. Rather have a guy who is high motor and high effort. That's something you can always work with.

[Mr. Body]

good scoring touch and finishing ability with the length that lets you believe that part of his game will translate. an already sound defender with tools to be a very good one, mainly needs to improve strength on that end

Actually wasn't really that good of a defender, was just long? Yeah part of it is strength, but he's not an advantage creator or a dampener on that end.

https://tankathon.com/players/compare?players=stephon-castle--cody-williams

What gets me is that Colorado started playing him less and less down the stretch of the season. Okay, yes, because they had veterans. But I've always felt Cody Williams was treated like a little baby, with kid gloves, with all kinds of excuses for his play. Babying him in a way other players don't get babied.

Castle is the same age and absolutely crushes him in production and advanced stats playing vital minutes for a juggernaut while Cody's minutes were getting cut. Castle outrebounded him by 2.4 per 36 minutes while being a guard. Castle even had a higher three point rate, that's how reluctant and slow Williams was with his shot. Yet we get this impression that Cody is a sixteen year old who needs to be brought around slowly while Castle is a fully formed twenty-four year old.

It would full on suck taking Williams at 4 and questionable to reach at 8.

[CGD]

Would be pleased with a Castle+Williams haul, but would be even happier if they’re able to drop back a few spots to pick up another asset while still drafting him.

[spurraider21]

brandon ingram has a similar build and currently weighs 190 pounds

[Mr. Body]

And, once again, Johnny Furphy blows Cody Williams away.

https://tankathon.com/players/compare?players=johnny-furphy--cody-williams

Way more willing to put the shots up, vastly better rebounder, actually a better defender, even.

[spurraider21]

Actually wasn't really that good of a defender, was just long? Yeah part of it is strength, but he's not an advantage creator or a dampener on that end.

https://tankathon.com/players/compare?players=stephon-castle--cody-williams

What gets me is that Colorado started playing him less and less down the stretch of the season. Okay, yes, because they had veterans. But I've always felt Cody Williams was treated like a little baby, with kid gloves, with all kinds of excuses for his play. Babying him in a way other players don't get babied.

Castle is the same age and absolutely crushes him in production and advanced stats playing vital minutes for a juggernaut while Cody's minutes were getting cut. Castle outrebounded him by 2.4 per 36 minutes while being a guard. Castle even had a higher three point rate, that's how reluctant and slow Williams was with his shot. Yet we get this impression that Cody is a sixteen year old who needs to be brought around slowly while Castle is a fully formed twenty-four year old.

It would full on suck taking Williams at 4 and questionable to reach at 8.
i have castle a tier above williams on my board, so you dont necessarily have to sell me. though if castle is being drafted as a PG i probably drop him by 2 tiers


from a spurs-centric perspective, here's probably how i do it

Tier 1 - I would be happy if we selected him at #4 overall

Risacher
Sheppard
Dillingham

Tier 2 - I would be content with selecting him at #4, but would be happy getting him at #8

Sarr
Holland
Castle* (not point guard)

Tier 3 - I would be content with selecting him at #8
Buzelis
Cody Williams
Clingan

Tier 4 - I could live with selecting him at #8

Knecht
Topic
Collier
Carter
anybody else (read: Salaun) would be :pctoss

sarr is a weird one because the fit isnt obvious but at some point you bet on the player talent and figure it out later. its also why i have clingan in tier 3

[exstatic]

Personally not dismissive. It's exactly the sort of pick they'd do. Just think in two years we'll forget he's even on the team even when he's playing twenty minutes a game.

He's just... nothing.

https://www.tankathon.com/players/cody-williams

Check out his last twelve games or so. He barely rebounds, a big effort stat. He is a wallflower. But he's a good kid! He's very polite.

He was inured, but playing through it.

[Mr. Body]

He was inured, but playing through it.

Yeah that's what they say. His pain threshold must be below that of a toddler.

[PhantomDashCam]

Out of all those long, rangy wings - Buzelis, Risacher and Salaun - Williams is the guy I envision having the toughest road to getting on the NBA floor early.

[rankingtear]

He is working out for everyone and does not demand to play PG. I like him.

[Chinook]

Williams is the rare forward in this draft who would probably be projected as the starting three rather than the backup four next year. If we were talking about Buzelis or Holland, they could play PF and possibly benefit both themselves and the team immediately by providing defense and dynamism to a bench that is pretty stagnant. Williams' lack of strength makes that harder. He can shoot and attack closeouts, though, and that's arguably what the team should want from their SF next year ESPECIALLY if they take Castle to be their starting PG. I'd worry about the roster overall if the Spurs ran a rotation of:

Castle, Jones
Vassell, Branham
Williams, Johnson
Sochan, Champangie
Wembanyama, Collins

It just kind of feels meh, though they'd still have their cap space and the RE in additions to trades and their second-rounders. Just feels like besides the push toward Monk, it would be easier to find a starting SF in the Spurs' price range (trading for Hunter, signing Jones or Patrick Williams) than it is to find another position to bolster the roster. If the Spurs want a shooting forward who could slot into the backup PF role, the Tyler Smith in a trade-down scenario might be better. Maybe they also add Edey or Carter if that situation.

[DPG21920]

Williams is the rare forward in this draft who would probably be projected as the starting three rather than the backup four next year. If we were talking about Buzelis or Holland, they could play PF and possibly benefit both themselves and the team immediately by providing defense and dynamism to a bench that is pretty stagnant. Williams' lack of strength makes that harder. He can shoot and attack closeouts, though, and that's arguably what the team should want from their SF next year ESPECIALLY if they take Castle to be their starting PG. I'd worry about the roster overall if the Spurs ran a rotation of:

Castle, Jones
Vassell, Branham
Williams, Johnson
Sochan, Champangie
Wembanyama, Collins

It just kind of feels meh, though they'd still have their cap space and the RE in additions to trades and their second-rounders. Just feels like besides the push toward Monk, it would be easier to find a starting SF in the Spurs' price range (trading for Hunter, signing Jones or Patrick Williams) than it is to find another position to bolster the roster. If the Spurs want a shooting forward who could slot into the backup PF role, the Tyler Smith in a trade-down scenario might be better. Maybe they also add Edey or Carter if that situation.

Is that how you’re thinking about it? My mind has not even gone that far; to me it’s about BPA and who Spurs think that is longer term. We want to keep moving the team forward and winning more games, but theres not intense pressure for the draft picks this year to be immediate higher end starters or contributors in my mind. That just sort of clouds things for my thinking personally.

I dont disagree with what you said here, but more about the framework of approaching draft independent of FA/Trades as to me that’s really separate things to a degree.

[baseline bum]

JFC if they pick Williams at #4 I hope Brian Wright gets hung from his balls from the front of the Alamo.

[DPG21920]

JFC if they pick Williams at #4 I hope Brian Wright gets hung from his balls from the front of the Alamo.

lol why? Pick 4 or pick 8 in this draft is just not that different. If spurs like Cody, who cares if he is at 4 or 8 especially if they are fine with Castle, Carter, Reed, Dillingham and can for sure get one of them at 8 going into pick 4 where they don’t think Cody will make it?

It’s like ATL with Clingan and people saying hes a reach at one but it would be fine at 4. I mean, if it’s fine at 4, it’s fine at 1 tbh….sure trading back and getting extra is great if you can do it but at end of the day you just have to get your guys.

[ChumpDumper]

True enough. Getting whiplash from all these swings in the mocks. Guys are going either #1 or #17. Take just about anyone but please get at least one guy who can already shoot.

[Vienna]

lol why? Pick 4 or pick 8 in this draft is just not that different. If spurs like Cody, who cares if he is at 4 or 8 especially if they are fine with Castle, Carter, Reed, Dillingham and can for sure get one of them at 8 going into pick 4 where they don’t think Cody will make it?


totally agree. if they really like Cody (assuming Risacher and probably Castle are gone), it will be the better strategy to pick him at 4. he likely won't be there at 8.

regarding all this strenght, weight and "toughness" talk....no one doubts the need for adding weight. and yes, his brother is a reference, because there is a very good chance that the same gene pool produces a similar development trajectory. Jalen went from 190 in his Freshman season, when he was 19 like Cody is right now, to 209 in the combine, when he was 21. you compare their body types and it's not that far off to think Cody should be able to gain some 20lbs in two years. or 30 if you consider NBA environment. maybe Colorade didn't put much focus on this. da Silva took some time to gain weight as well.
no one knows if this solves the "toghness" issue, but it won't hurt in this department.
rebounding....yeah, that's an issue. but he wasn't a bad rebounder in high school and, for whatever this is worth, at the FIBA U19 world cup he had 8.1 rebounds per 36 minutes (7 games). as has been pointed out, Colorado was a good rebounding team, so you can make a case, that rebounds he allegedly should have got, ended up in the hands of a teammate.......Cody might just not have been egoistic enough about his stats, or there was a general rule to leave the windfall to the guards an get on the break.

[tbdog]

Is that how you’re thinking about it? My mind has not even gone that far; to me it’s about BPA and who Spurs think that is longer term. We want to keep moving the team forward and winning more games, but theres not intense pressure for the draft picks this year to be immediate higher end starters or contributors in my mind. That just sort of clouds things for my thinking personally.

I dont disagree with what you said here, but more about the framework of approaching draft independent of FA/Trades as to me that’s really separate things to a degree.

Considering how strong last years draft was, and how few didn't look like disasters - really makes you wonder if any of these picks will start.

[AFBlue]

This guy is the definition of role player...jack of all trades, master of none. No dog in him to elevate to star or superstar level. And it'll take him a year or more to get there. He's smart and skilled, but I'd be disappointed if he ends up in a Spurs uni at #4. Maybe he'd be an okay pick at #8, depending how the board falls.

[Mr. Body]

lol why? Pick 4 or pick 8 in this draft is just not that different. If spurs like Cody, who cares if he is at 4 or 8 especially if they are fine with Castle, Carter, Reed, Dillingham and can for sure get one of them at 8 going into pick 4 where they don’t think Cody will make it?

It’s like ATL with Clingan and people saying hes a reach at one but it would be fine at 4. I mean, if it’s fine at 4, it’s fine at 1 tbh….sure trading back and getting extra is great if you can do it but at end of the day you just have to get your guys.

Picking him at 4 literally means they value him over other prospects as they prioritize not having three needy teams possibly take him, no?

Taking him at 4 means they prioritize him over nearly everyone else in the draft.

[The Truth #6]

He definitely seems like the type of Cosby Kid that is irresistible to Brian Wright. I really don't have a strong opinion on him other than I can see the Spurs being interested in him...

[SpursFan86]

lol why? Pick 4 or pick 8 in this draft is just not that different. If spurs like Cody, who cares if he is at 4 or 8 especially if they are fine with Castle, Carter, Reed, Dillingham and can for sure get one of them at 8 going into pick 4 where they don’t think Cody will make it?

It’s like ATL with Clingan and people saying hes a reach at one but it would be fine at 4. I mean, if it’s fine at 4, it’s fine at 1 tbh….sure trading back and getting extra is great if you can do it but at end of the day you just have to get your guys.

I agree that ultimately if they really love Williams and he’s their guy, then it’s not worth risking it to hope he drops to 8…but I guess it’s just more so a pretty surprising development if they like him more than Sheppard/Castle/Risacher. Feel like most of the consensus big boards out there don’t have Williams top 5.

In the end we have to trust the Spurs’ FO over industry draft analysts regardless so it is what it is. Hope they don’t go with him at 4 though.

[SpursDynasty85]

brandon ingram has a similar build and currently weighs 190 pounds

Ingram is taller and longer.. Easily. Doing more research, he is likely 6'8" w/o shoes, 7' 3" wingspan, and closer to 200 lbs. Things like the aren't always updated every year. He was closer to 190 as a rookie. I imagine his hands were a lot bigger. That is the glaring thing I see on Cody Williams, good size and length. Terrible weight and small hands for his size.

[Uriel]

My personal ranking of wings in this draft:

1. Risacher
2. Buzelis
3. Salaun
4. Williams
5. Knecht

[Chinook]

Is that how you’re thinking about it? My mind has not even gone that far; to me it’s about BPA and who Spurs think that is longer term. We want to keep moving the team forward and winning more games, but theres not intense pressure for the draft picks this year to be immediate higher end starters or contributors in my mind. That just sort of clouds things for my thinking personally.

I dont disagree with what you said here, but more about the framework of approaching draft independent of FA/Trades as to me that’s really separate things to a degree.

The Spurs have to strike a balance between potential and production with their picks. They can't draft "two years away" players at 4 or 8. It's perfectly fine to draft guys who need a couple of years to grow into themselves, but those guys should still be rotation players this upcoming season. For example, Dillingham may need to gain muscle and learn defense, but he can still be a gunner off the bench. Holland and Buzelis need to learn to shoot, but they can still play the backup PF spot and contribute in the meantime. Williams is sort of locked into the starting SF role unless the Spurs want to run him and Keldon as the forwards off the bench, which could happen but is probably not a great idea. The good news is because he can shoot and because Sochan is available to guard size, Williams might be able to survive there.

Free agency and the rest of the summer aren't independent of the draft, though. Yes, the Spurs should draft BPA, but who that ends up being will affect what moves the team makes going forward. If they draft guards, they shouldn't be looking to spend big on a guard in free agency. If they draft forwards, they shouldn't also trade for Hunter or sign Jones/Williams. The Spurs only have so many roster spots, and the last thing they should want is to freeze out their own young players with their new free-agent acquisitions. I'm all for competition, but that means having viable options at every spot and letting young guys earn their time, not by stacking a couple of positions with all of the investment

[DPG21920]

Considering how strong last years draft was, and how few didn't look like disasters - really makes you wonder if any of these picks will start.

I believe at least one will depending on how it goes and of course depending on if Spurs stay at 4/8. Spurs have minutes available and unless something changes unexpectedly like trading for Garland/Trae/Murray type, I don’t think there will be pressure to “win” next season so they can afford developmental minutes too.

Especially because the guys that they would be taking minutes from (a combo of Graham who barley played, Branham/Blake who aren’t anything special at this point and also young, etc…) are not winning players (at least yet). Theres at least 7 guys that are not going to be long term players with the Spurs currently on roster that are easily replaceable if SA lands guys with higher ceilings.

So I think they will get minutes just by default in that regard

[DPG21920]

Picking him at 4 literally means they value him over other prospects as they prioritize not having three needy teams possibly take him, no?

Taking him at 4 means they prioritize him over nearly everyone else in the draft.

Not necessarily- it could just mean that they dont love any guard as much as they love a particular wing and that when they get to pick 4, they assess 4 guards are still available they feel indifferent about comparatively so picking their favorite wing makes more sense strategically

[DPG21920]

I agree that ultimately if they really love Williams and he’s their guy, then it’s not worth risking it to hope he drops to 8…but I guess it’s just more so a pretty surprising development if they like him more than Sheppard/Castle/Risacher. Feel like most of the consensus big boards out there don’t have Williams top 5.

In the end we have to trust the Spurs’ FO over industry draft analysts regardless so it is what it is. Hope they don’t go with him at 4 though.

For sure - I would be nervous if they passed on Reed for Cody in that situation so Im not strongly advocating for Cody or something. But I also can understand, whether I personally value Cody highly or not, why if Spurs do that picking him 4 v 8 is just not an issue or that big of a reach. They’d only do that if they have strong intel that he would not make it to 8 and they really want him right?

So at that point, it would be confirmation it’s not a reach regardless of what mocks say since in reality another team was going to take him before 8 and had him rated highly as well.

[DPG21920]

The Spurs have to strike a balance between potential and production with their picks. They can't draft "two years away" players at 4 or 8. It's perfectly fine to draft guys who need a couple of years to grow into themselves, but those guys should still be rotation players this upcoming season. For example, Dillingham may need to gain muscle and learn defense, but he can still be a gunner off the bench. Holland and Buzelis need to learn to shoot, but they can still play the backup PF spot and contribute in the meantime. Williams is sort of locked into the starting SF role unless the Spurs want to run him and Keldon as the forwards off the bench, which could happen but is probably not a great idea. The good news is because he can shoot and because Sochan is available to guard size, Williams might be able to survive there.

Free agency and the rest of the summer aren't independent of the draft, though. Yes, the Spurs should draft BPA, but who that ends up being will affect what moves the team makes going forward. If they draft guards, they shouldn't be looking to spend big on a guard in free agency. If they draft forwards, they shouldn't also trade for Hunter or sign Jones/Williams. The Spurs only have so many roster spots, and the last thing they should want is to freeze out their own young players with their new free-agent acquisitions. I'm all for competition, but that means having viable options at every spot and letting young guys earn their time, not by stacking a couple of positions with all of the investment

Sure - Im just not worried about minutes even if we take projects. Literally half the team has proven very little to nothing and several are still young themselves still and can be replaced. It would be one thing drafting 2 projects and forcing them into a rotation over good players, but replacing Branham/Blake minutes for example with these guys is really not that different or big of a deal IMO.

You take BPA period IMO and there will be minutes even if you stack in free agency and trade. Just means you are waiving guys like Branham/Blake to do it and open up minutes or trading Tre Jones etc..

[exstatic]

Picking him at 4 literally means they value him over other prospects as they prioritize not having three needy teams possibly take him, no?

Taking him at 4 means they prioritize him over nearly everyone else in the draft.

Or maybe the Spurs do apply game theory, and think that 5-7 is a PG dead zone, and that they’ll get one at 8.

[ulosturedge]

lol why? Pick 4 or pick 8 in this draft is just not that different. If spurs like Cody, who cares if he is at 4 or 8 especially if they are fine with Castle, Carter, Reed, Dillingham and can for sure get one of them at 8 going into pick 4 where they don’t think Cody will make it?

It’s like ATL with Clingan and people saying hes a reach at one but it would be fine at 4. I mean, if it’s fine at 4, it’s fine at 1 tbh….sure trading back and getting extra is great if you can do it but at end of the day you just have to get your guys.

We get the whole your guy is your guy thing. But personally speaking if they think Cody is BPA at #4 then they all need to be fired. I wouldn't put him ahead of Sheppard, Castle, or Clingan.

Clingan or an outside shot we get Risacher at #4 would be the only way we flip to drafting Guard at #8.

[DPG21920]

Or maybe the Spurs do apply game theory, and think that 5-7 is a PG dead zone, and that they’ll get one at 8.

This is how I think of it. I think with two picks so close together, this has to be in play the most. Good news SA should have all the capital they need to move up if they need to with either DET or CHA one would think.

[exstatic]

Considering how strong last years draft was, and how few didn't look like disasters - really makes you wonder if any of these picks will start.

I hated The twins and Scoot, and still think they’ll all three bomb out. Three thru five in this draft may wind up being better than last year’s. There were some value picks after 5 last year, though.

[DPG21920]

We get the whole your guy is your guy thing. But personally speaking if they think Cody is BPA at #4 then they all need to be fired. I wouldn't put him ahead of Sheppard, Castle, or Clingan.

Clingan or an outside shot we get Risacher at #4 would be the only way we flip to drafting Guard at #8.

Thats you though lol (and that’s fine). Not everyone is going to rate guys the same way and we just have to live with that. Fact is, regardless of how much you personally have Reed, Castle over Cody, not every FO will feel that way. That doesnt make it egregious.

Im not as high on Castle as most here; I think he has higher bust potential that most give credence to. But I would still be very happy if SA got him too and believed in him.

I like the wings more than all the guards except for Reed *personally*. I would love to walk away with 2 of Holland/Buzelis/Risacher/Cody at 4 and 8 if we dont get Reed. I don’t think that happens, but I would not mind it at all.

[baseline bum]

Or maybe the Spurs do apply game theory, and think that 5-7 is a PG dead zone, and that they’ll get one at 8.

Much better to be choosy with the PG (Castle or Sheppard) knowing either Clingan or one of the wings with potential (Buzelis, Holland, Williams) will be there at 8 when the wings all have low floors while Castle and Sheppard are very hard not to see having long and productive NBA careers. And if it's Clingan the Spurs have a great trade piece or a good backup for Victor.

[baseline bum]

Thats you though lol (and that’s fine). Not everyone is going to rate guys the same way and we just have to live with that. Fact is, regardless of how much you personally have Reed, Castle over Cody, not every FO will feel that way. That doesnt make it egregious.

Im not as high on Castle as most here; I think he has higher bust potential that most give credence to. But I would still be very happy if SA got him too and believed in him.

I like the wings more than all the guards except for Reed *personally*. I would love to walk away with 2 of Holland/Buzelis/Risacher/Cody at 4 and 8 if we dont get Reed. I don’t think that happens, but I would not mind it at all.

You like Cody Williams and think Castle is the one with bust potential? Worst case for Castle is he's a defensive stopper off the bench, like a Gary Payton II or a Patrick Beverley. Williams' floor could be Shanghai Sharks.

[DPG21920]

You like Cody Williams and think Castle is the one with bust potential? Worst case for Castle is he's a defensive stopper off the bench, like a Gary Payton II or a Patrick Beverley. Williams' floor could be Shanghai Sharks.

I like both Castle and Cody. I think Cody has bust potential. I simply said I think that Castle has more bust potential than posters like you give credence to. Those are different things.

[The Truth #6]

He does seem like the sort of cautious player that the Spurs seem to overemphasize in my opinion, but the flip s aside to that is good character and good interviewing skills I suppose.

When I think of drafting Cody, for some reason I think of his potential flaws and then think of the opposite type of player such as Ron Holland, who despite his raw skills or lack thereof, has a lot of event creation and is not passive, so even though his shot is totally broken, there's a chance he will be open to completely reworking it, whereas a lot of people don't want to touch their shot at all, such as Devin Carter as he mentioned in an interview with KOC.

Obviously, no perfect candidates...

[DPG21920]

He does seem like the sort of cautious player that the Spurs seem to overemphasize in my opinion, but the flip side to that is good character and good interviewing skills I suppose.

Castle is the same level of cautious IMO. Dude refuses to look to score or shoot so many times. It’s one of my biggest concerns with him. So if you are drafting for defense and playmaking upside, Cody compares very well to him there.

[The Truth #6]

Castle is the same level of cautious IMO. Dude refuses to look to score or shoot so many times. It’s one of my biggest concerns with him. So if you are drafting for defense and playmaking upside, Cody compares very well to him there.

While you were responding to my post, I was adding to it, and yeah being overly cautious at 19 years old, when most people are super aggressive at that age, can be a concern.

[SpursFan86]

For sure - I would be nervous if they passed on Reed for Cody in that situation so Im not strongly advocating for Cody or something. But I also can understand, whether I personally value Cody highly or not, why if Spurs do that picking him 4 v 8 is just not an issue or that big of a reach. They’d only do that if they have strong intel that he would not make it to 8 and they really want him right?

So at that point, it would be confirmation it’s not a reach regardless of what mocks say since in reality another team was going to take him before 8 and had him rated highly as well.

The same strong intel that made them feel compelled to take Primo at 12? :lol

Again I do see where you’re coming from, and I don’t think Williams is THAT big of a reach. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if some teams would consider him in the 5-10 range. I just personally am higher on a few other guys and I even think the general consensus amongst experts is that Williams isn’t a top 5 guy, so can’t help but feel a little uneasy about them taking him at 4. Especially if someone like Sheppard is sitting there.

Edit: and I guess my question would be - how would you feel if they took Salaun at 4? He’s a guy who has gotten some buzz in the top 10 and it’s not crazy to see him going in the 5-7 range. Would you feel comfortable if the Spurs took him at 4 and just chalk it up to “Well we got our guy so you can’t get mad at it”? Not being flippant, legitimately curious.

[ulosturedge]

I like both Castle and Cody. I think Cody has bust potential. I simply said I think that Castle has more bust potential than posters like you give credence to. Those are different things.

For the record i'm not high on Castle either. At least at him translating to a True Point Guard. But he has enough traits to find a role for him. On the other hand I'm in agreement with BB that Cody's Floor is much lower.

[DPG21920]

The same strong intel that made them feel compelled to take Primo at 12? :lol

Again I do see where you’re coming from, and I don’t think Williams is THAT big of a reach. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if some teams would consider him in the 5-10 range. I just personally am higher on a few other guys and I even think the general consensus amongst experts is that Williams isn’t a top 5 guy, so can’t help but feel a little uneasy about them taking him at 4. Especially if someone like Sheppard is sitting there.

The way I boil it down is I would be ok with walking away with 2 of these core guys and I dont care which one comes at 4 or 8: Reed, Holland, Buzelis, Castle, Risacher, Cody, Carter and Sarr

[Mr. Body]

Castle is the same level of cautious IMO. Dude refuses to look to score or shoot so many times. It’s one of my biggest concerns with him. So if you are drafting for defense and playmaking upside, Cody compares very well to him there.

Castle actually had a higher three point shot rate than Williams, meaning he was more willing to pull, or that Williams just never did.

They were both fitting in among many established older players. Castle took on many more duties than Williams ever did, who was sort of a tagalong. Again, Castle was aggressive when he needed to be and was incredibly important at the end of the season when Williams was finding his minutes cut and was close to unplayable.

There's really no comparison.

[DPG21920]

For the record i'm not high on Castle either. At least at him translating to a True Point Guard. But he has enough traits to find a role for him. On the other hand I'm in agreement with BB that Cody's Floor is much lower.

Without getting into the weeds I sort of disagree on that mainly on the basis that even if Castles floor is higher, it’s not materially higher to where it matters in reality. Having a higher floor doesnt help the Spurs and despite having a higher floor if those players are at their floors they wont be here long anyways.

[DPG21920]

Castle actually had a higher three point shot rate than Williams, meaning he was more willing to pull, or that Williams just never did.

They were both fitting in among many established older players. Castle took on many more duties than Williams ever did, who was sort of a tagalong. Again, Castle was aggressive when he needed to be and was incredibly important at the end of the season when Williams was finding his minutes cut and was close to unplayable.

There's really no comparison.

Difference is Cody shot better, at least for stretches and I would buy his 3Ball more than Castles.

[Seventyniner]

The way I boil it down is I would be ok with walking away with 2 of these core guys and I dont care which one comes at 4 or 8: Reed, Holland, Buzelis, Castle, Risacher, Cody, Carter and Sarr

The nice thing about having 8 players on your list is that the Spurs are guaranteed to get two of them, of course assuming that their big board has the same 8 names at the top.

[DPG21920]

The nice thing about having 8 players on your list is that the Spurs are guaranteed to get two of them, of course assuming that their big board has the same 8 names at the top.

Exactly lol! I mean, who here feels SO strongly about two guys where its seems crystal clear beyond any reasonable doubt that theres 2 clear cut guys you can just bank on being really damn good with very little concerns?

I have 8 players on my list because the nature of this draft and the prospects. I normally have way higher conviction on a player or two; I just dont have that here on anyone but Reed/Holland but even then my hope of landing that duo isnt even me being mega sure about them with a really firm conviction; its just the two I personally have sort of reasoned as my comparative favorites in this draft.

[ulosturedge]

Assuming Risacher is not there at #4, the only Wing/Player I'd want at 8 is Holland or Knecht. I don't get the hype around Buzelis, Cody seemed exciting at first until digging into his traits, and Salaun looks like a total project pick.

[baseline bum]

Castle is the same level of cautious IMO. Dude refuses to look to score or shoot so many times. It’s one of my biggest concerns with him. So if you are drafting for defense and playmaking upside, Cody compares very well to him there.

Not what I got out of watching Castle at all. Has a decent in between game with some nice floaters and size and good strength at the rim but shies away from shooting the three, which can hopefully be corrected like it was with Kawhi. Right now he looks like a better version of Jrue Holiday at the same age and he seems to have the motor to continue developing, which is something I'm a little concerned about with Williams seeing how disinterested and uninvolved he can look at times when I have watched Colorado games. Not saying I wouldn't draft Williams, as he could be a nice swing for the fences at 8.

[BatManu20]

Castle should be the pick at 4 if he's there (assuming Risacher is gone). If the somehow Spurs take Cody Williams over Castle, we riot.

[BatManu20]

Castle's floor imo is a Jrue Holiday-type player, which to me is an easy selection. His ceiling is a Jimmy Butler type player, which is an even easier selection. Between his size, his elite defensive traits, his advanced feel for the game, and the intangibles, a 3-point shot is the only thing keeping Castle from being a future All-Star imo. And at only 19 years old, he still has plenty of time to improve on that. Jrue Holiday and Jimmy Butler couldn't shoot the 3 either in college. Castle's FT% suggests he'll get there. Then you're talking about a potential 2-way monster in a few years. Would be an awesome complementary piece to Wemby tbh.

[DPG21920]

Not what I got out of watching Castle at all. Has a decent in between game with some nice floaters and size and good strength at the rim but shies away from shooting the three, which can hopefully be corrected like it was with Kawhi. Right now he looks like a better version of Jrue Holiday at the same age and he seems to have the motor to continue developing, which is something I'm a little concerned about with Williams seeing how disinterested and uninvolved he can look at times when I have watched Colorado games. Not saying I wouldn't draft Williams, as he could be a nice swing for the fences at 8.

All that’s fair and if you’re asking me what my personal ranking is? I probably have Castle slightly ahead of Cody. Just not a massive gap is all IMO. I saw a lot more hesitation than many of yall from Castle and not just from 3. But that’s just my take and I know that’s sort of anti-consensus on this board.

I also think Cody’s injury played a role to a degree and like we saw with Derrick White when he had a down year after injuries and what he looked like when healthy, I think same for Cody most likely.

[DPG21920]

Castle's floor imo is a Jrue Holiday-type player, which to me is an easy selection. His ceiling is a Jimmy Butler type player, which is an even easier selection. Between his size, his elite defensive, his advanced feel for the game, and the intangibles, a 3-point shot is the only thing keeping Castle from being a future All-Star imo. And at only 19 years old, he still has plenty of time to improve on that. Jrue Holiday and Jimmy Butler couldn't shoot the 3 either in college. Castle's FT% suggests he'll get there. Then you're talking about a potential 2-way monster in a few years. Would be an awesome complementary piece to Wemby tbh.

His floor is not Jrue lol. If that were the case he’s easily the number one pick. Now, may he turn out that good? Absolutely theres a chance of that. But his floor is not a DPOY multi time champion winner like Jrue

[BatManu20]

His floor is not Jrue lol. If that were the case he’s easily the number one pick. Now, may he turn out that good? Absolutely theres a chance of that. But his floor is not a DPOY multi time champion winner like Jrue

Yea maybe Jrue is a bit ambitious as a floor. A better, bigger, and more intelligent Marcus Smart then? Either way, I think he's actually one of the safer bets in this draft to become AT LEAST a very good starter for years to come. He has one of the highest ceilings in the draft imo if/when that shot comes around.

[spurraider21]

His floor is not Jrue lol. If that were the case he’s easily the number one pick. Now, may he turn out that good? Absolutely theres a chance of that. But his floor is not a DPOY multi time champion winner like Jrue
:lol tbh

if his floor was jrue, the hawks would even take him

[SpursFan86]

Yea maybe Jrue is a bit ambitious as a floor. A better, bigger, and more intelligent Marcus Smart then? Either way, I think he's actually one of the safer bets in this draft to become AT LEAST a very good starter for years to come. He has one of the highest ceilings in the draft imo if/when that shot comes around.

Man I think even that is a bit generous of a floor. Smart was a ~35% 3 point shooter on solid volume in his best years…it’s entirely possible Castle doesn’t sniff that if his jumper doesn’t develop.

[Chinook]

Sure - Im just not worried about minutes even if we take projects. Literally half the team has proven very little to nothing and several are still young themselves still and can be replaced. It would be one thing drafting 2 projects and forcing them into a rotation over good players, but replacing Branham/Blake minutes for example with these guys is really not that different or big of a deal IMO.

You take BPA period IMO and there will be minutes even if you stack in free agency and trade. Just means you are waiving guys like Branham/Blake to do it and open up minutes or trading Tre Jones etc..

The draft is BPA. Free agency is not. The draft comes first and thus informs teams of what their free-agent needs are. Ultimately, the FO should be trying to put together a functional team that efficiently uses its talent to win games. That means not letting guys like Champ, Bran, Wes and the rest have rotation spots without challenge. If you try to take a BPA approach to free agency and overstock your roster with on position, you fail to bring in adequate competition and depth for the other positions. The team can end up without a viable starting SF and no real means of bringing one in and having Champ continue to start there. Blake and Malaki could end up as the bench guard rotation while Cissoko is cut because the Spurs decided to use two top-10 picks, their big junk of cap space and the RE all on front-court guys. To me, that would be a disservice to Wemby, Vassell and every other Spur trying to win games. The team has too many holes to triple-dip on a position.

The team doesn't need their picks to be stars or even starters right now, but they do need them to be real NBA players. In other words, the ability to contribute immediately while building toward their upside should be factored into the definition of BPA the team is using to make their picks.

[BatManu20]

:lol tbh

if his floor was jrue, the hawks would even take him

Should've added poor man's* Jrue tbh. The point still stands though. I don't see how anyone could hate that pick assuming Zacc is off the board (I'm confident he will be).

[BatManu20]

Man I think even that is a bit generous of a floor. Smart was a ~35% 3 point shooter on solid volume in his best years…it’s entirely possible Castle doesn’t sniff that if his jumper doesn’t develop.

It's a possibility of course, but I think the odds are strongly in his favor given his mechanics and FT%. The odds of him not improving from 3 whatsoever in his career are lower than the odds of him improving to even NBA average (around 36%) in due time imo. None of these guys come without major red flags tbh. Even Risacher and Sarr. That's why this draft is such a crap shoot. To me, Castle is definitely one of the safer picks, especially if those aforementioned guys are off the board. I certainly wouldn't take 188 lbs Cody Williams over him.

[NASpurs]

I get the point of the discussion and how there's not really much to talk about besides hypotheticals but the end of the day, it's funny when the Spurs end up drafting Topic with the #4 pick.

[BatManu20]

I get the point of the discussion and how there's not really much to talk about besides hypotheticals but the end of the day, it's funny when the Spurs end up drafting Topic with the #4 pick.

Highly doubtful, though you never know with BW. That'd be a big swing given the recent red flags though. At 8 would be much more palatable and much better value if they're going to go that route.

[Kurik]

To be honest I think Castle’s floor is in the realm of a bigger Bruce Brown. But you don’t draft Castle for his floor either.

[NASpurs]

Highly doubtful, though you never know with BW. That'd be a big swing given the recent red flags though. At 8 would be much more palatable and much better value if they're going to go that route.

Yeah exactly but... it's the Spurs we're talking about here :lol

Some shit will come out that they heard discussion about a team picking 5 - 7 wanting Topic/Salaun/*insert name* so they jumped the gun picking him 4 lol

I'm just ready to be left scratching my head June 26th.

[BatManu20]

To be honest I think Castle’s floor is in the realm of a bigger Bruce Brown. But you don’t draft Castle for his floor either.

I see the comparison, but I think you're underselling Castle with that one imo. He definitely has more natural talent than Brown tbh, who was a SRP. He certainly has a better feel for the game than BB. Castle was a 5-Star recruit and a Top-10 Nationally ranked player coming out of high school for a reason.

[DPG21920]

The draft is BPA. Free agency is not. The draft comes first and thus informs teams of what their free-agent needs are. Ultimately, the FO should be trying to put together a functional team that efficiently uses its talent to win games. That means not letting guys like Champ, Bran, Wes and the rest have rotation spots without challenge. If you try to take a BPA approach to free agency and overstock your roster with on position, you fail to bring in adequate competition and depth for the other positions. The team can end up without a viable starting SF and no real means of bringing one in and having Champ continue to start there. Blake and Malaki could end up as the bench guard rotation while Cissoko is cut because the Spurs decided to use two top-10 picks, their big junk of cap space and the RE all on front-court guys. To me, that would be a disservice to Wemby, Vassell and every other Spur trying to win games. The team has too many holes to triple-dip on a position.

The team doesn't need their picks to be stars or even starters right now, but they do need them to be real NBA players. In other words, the ability to contribute immediately while building toward their upside should be factored into the definition of BPA the team is using to make their picks.

Ya - that’s fair. I was just saying I don’t foresee too much over lap and that’s all sort of baked in and that any player coming in would have a clear path and that if we wanted a guard in FA too, it would be because we likely let one go as well etc…So its no different drafting Castle and having Tre/Branham on the roster already vs drafting Castle, signing a PG and trading Tre/waiving Branham etc..

[DPG21920]

Should've added poor man's* Jrue tbh. The point still stands though. I don't see how anyone could hate that pick assuming Zacc is off the board (I'm confident he will be).

I wouldn’t hate it at all. I would be excited. But even though I wouldn’t hate it that doesnt mean I can unsee his flaws lol

[BatManu20]

Yeah exactly but... it's the Spurs we're talking about here :lol

Some shit will come out that they heard discussion about a team picking 5 - 7 wanting Topic/Salaun/*insert name* so they jumped the gun picking him 4 lol

I'm just ready to be left scratching my head June 26th.

Salaun is the one I'm worried about tbh. If he's on the board at 8, think the Spurs might be too tempted to pass on Wemby's buddy. Then that would signal that we're definitely not in "win-now" mode as he's a couple away from even being a starter imo, let alone a productive one.

[DPG21920]

I get the point of the discussion and how there's not really much to talk about besides hypotheticals but the end of the day, it's funny when the Spurs end up drafting Topic with the #4 pick.

Thats the one dude who is NOT on my list lmao. But Im prepared for it.

[spurraider21]

Should've added poor man's* Jrue tbh. The point still stands though. I don't see how anyone could hate that pick assuming Zacc is off the board (I'm confident he will be).
i liked castle until people started talking about him as a point guard. i dont see it. supposedly he was a lead guard in high school but i didnt see it in college, even from a traits perspective. he's a good passer in traffic, there's that. but i dont think he creates separation off the dribble, isnt much of a midrange shooter either. its just kinda bullyball toward the rim. and i think hes a good ballhandler for a wing but i dont see lead guard chops. and then when it comes to playing off wemby, with all the inverted pick and roll stuff he likes to do, outside shooting feels like a requirement, not a bonus feature

[BatManu20]

i liked castle until people started talking about him as a point guard. i dont see it. supposedly he was a lead guard in high school but i didnt see it in college, even from a traits perspective. he's a good passer in traffic, there's that. but i dont think he creates separation off the dribble, isnt much of a midrange shooter either. its just kinda bullyball toward the rim. and i think hes a good ballhandler for a wing but i dont see lead guard chops.

Yea I definitely don't see a true PG either with Castle. He's a combo guard who has good enough passing that it'll be a plus-trait for him as a wing, but no way should that be his full-time position imo. In his defense, he definitely sacrificed some playing for a loaded UCONN squad with older players, so maybe there's more there than he was able to show last year, but he'd have to really turn it on in his Rookie year to be considered a lead guard imo. And I just don't see that being the case.

[DPG21920]

i liked castle until people started talking about him as a point guard. i dont see it. supposedly he was a lead guard in high school but i didnt see it in college, even from a traits perspective. he's a good passer in traffic, there's that. but i dont think he creates separation off the dribble, isnt much of a midrange shooter either. its just kinda bullyball toward the rim. and i think hes a good ballhandler for a wing but i dont see lead guard chops. and then when it comes to playing off wemby, with all the inverted pick and roll stuff he likes to do, outside shooting feels like a requirement, not a bonus feature

Yup. He’s like Derrick White but without as much confidence of a 3PT shot or PG in a pinch duties. I do think he will excel in this system more than others though as he has a high iq and processes things well and he wont be a CP3 like PG in this system. He should do great as either someone making decisions off of the ball swinging and/or someone you can put in PnR even as a screener where he can apply pressure going to rim and make good reads etc…

But your point about the shooting is true. Wemby is going to have the ball A LOT and will be making most of decisions. Devin too. We aren’t drafting a CP3 type PG for this system. We are drafting what BOS has: a bunch of guards/wings that are very good on defense, can handle duties in a pinch and all bring the ball up the floor quickly and are good off ball making decisions or shooting 3’s etc…

[spurraider21]

Yup. He’s like Derrick White but without as much confidence of a 3PT shot or PG in a pinch duties. I do think he will excel in this system more than others though as he has a high iq and processes things well and he wont be a CP3 like PG in this system. He should do great as either someone making decisions off of the ball swinging and/or someone you can put in PnR even as a screener where he can apply pressure going to rim and make good reads etc…

But your point about the shooting is true. Wemby is going to have the ball A LOT and will be making most of decisions. Devin too. We aren’t drafting a CP3 type PG for this system. We are drafting what BOS has: a bunch of guards/wings that are very good on defense, can handle duties in a pinch and all bring the ball up the floor quickly and are good off ball making decisions or shooting 3’s etc…
yeah... thats also why ive really leaned away from Topic as a fit, and into Sheppard and Dillingham. at this point i think im comfortable saying I have reed above dilly, though i both have them in tier 1 alongside Risacher

[baseline bum]

I get the point of the discussion and how there's not really much to talk about besides hypotheticals but the end of the day, it's funny when the Spurs end up drafting Topic with the #4 pick.

Fuck me, I'd rather have Cody #4.

[baseline bum]

nm I see you answered that in a previous post :lol

[ulosturedge]

The team doesn't need their picks to be stars or even starters right now, but they do need them to be real NBA players. In other words, the ability to contribute immediately while building toward their upside should be factored into the definition of BPA the team is using to make their picks.

This is where I'm at atm. This draft looks BPA all the way, too risky to choose need over value. I know everyone want's a point guard bad, but there is no guarantee any of these guys actually turn into true Point Guards. Take the players that have strong traits that are most likely to give you something out of the gate and will translate to the NBA floor. I feel like their are some real land mines out there with players that aren't going to amount to much of anything in this draft. Just have to navigate this one as the names roll out on the board.

[Wilt Chamberlain]

The draft is BPA. Free agency is not. The draft comes first and thus informs teams of what their free-agent needs are. Ultimately, the FO should be trying to put together a functional team that efficiently uses its talent to win games. That means not letting guys like Champ, Bran, Wes and the rest have rotation spots without challenge. If you try to take a BPA approach to free agency and overstock your roster with on position, you fail to bring in adequate competition and depth for the other positions. The team can end up without a viable starting SF and no real means of bringing one in and having Champ continue to start there. Blake and Malaki could end up as the bench guard rotation while Cissoko is cut because the Spurs decided to use two top-10 picks, their big junk of cap space and the RE all on front-court guys. To me, that would be a disservice to Wemby, Vassell and every other Spur trying to win games. The team has too many holes to triple-dip on a position.

The team doesn't need their picks to be stars or even starters right now, but they do need them to be real NBA players. In other words, the ability to contribute immediately while building toward their upside should be factored into the definition of BPA the team is using to make their picks.

How would it be better to ignore your roster when drafting? When the Spurs were winning trophies with Duncan and Robinson they drafted a ton of wings and guards. 5's not so much.

[ChumpDumper]

This is where I'm at atm. This draft looks BPA all the way, too risky to choose need over value. I know everyone want's a point guard bad, but there is no guarantee any of these guys actually turn into true Point Guards. Take the players that have strong traits that are mostly likely to give you something out of the gate and will translate to the NBA floor. I feel like their are some real land mines out there with players that aren't going to amount to much of anything in this draft. Just have to navigate this one as the names roll out on the board.

Gonna be weird drafting Clingan at 4, but OK.

[Chinook]

How would it be better to ignore your roster when drafting? When the Spurs were winning trophies with Duncan and Robinson they drafted a ton of wings and guards. 5's not so much.

How you read what I said and got that, I don't know. My overall point is that the Spurs should be drafting assuming that 4 and 8 will be used on guys who will be in the rotation next year, so discussing their fit matters. Specifically in this post, it was that approaching free agency without factoring in the draft picks could put the team in a position where it's overstocking some positions while leaving the others with no real competition for the below-average players currently in the rotation. The spirit of our points align.

However, specifically when talking about the draft at this stage in the team's development, no position is off limits. The team is too fluid, and NBA positions are too flexible to preclude any prospect. They don't need to worry about the current roster when drafting, because anyone they draft has a path to minutes if they're good enough. It's after the draft when the team is using its final flexibility that it has to make sure it's putting the right pieces to make a decent roster for this season.

Also, the Spurs drafted plenty of bigs with Duncan. It might have been their most drafted position.

[ulosturedge]

Gonna be weird drafting Clingan at 4, but OK.

Why is that weird? I am all for drafting Clingan at #4 to be honest. I know it's an unpopular opinion around here, but I feel like he and Wemby can be on the floor together as well he could play as a good backup Center. The only guard I would take over Clingan at #4 would be Sheppard or possibly Castle. But I would risk taking Clingan at #4(if it played out that way) and end up with Carter, Topic, or Dillingham at #8. Maybe Clingan is "their guy" as DPG would put it and they are willing to take a chance at what guard they have left to choose from at #8.

[Wilt Chamberlain]

How you read what I said and got that, I don't know.

The draft is BPA.

You wrote that.

[Chinook]

The draft is BPA.

You wrote that.

Wait, are you just reading the first line from every post and judging everything from that?

[Wilt Chamberlain]

Wait, are you just reading the first line from every post and judging everything from that?

No, You wrote about free agency and then claimed the Spurs drafted bigs the most of any position group.

BPA still means that you ignore roster and its needs and just pick the highest grade player regardless of position.

The Spurs drafted Mahinmi and Spliitter after Robinson retired. Them drafting bigs most during the dynasty is a good joke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Antonio_Spurs_draft_history

[ChumpDumper]

Why is that weird? I am all for drafting Clingan at #4 to be honest. I know it's an unpopular opinion around here, but I feel like he and Wemby can be on the floor together as well he could play as a good backup Center. The only guard I would take over Clingan at #4 would be Sheppard or possibly Castle. But I would risk taking Clingan at #4(if it played out that way) and end up with Carter, Topic, or Dillingham at #8. Maybe Clingan is "their guy" as DPG would put it and they are willing to take a chance at what guard they have left to choose from at #8.Could be.

Will be weird if that's the case IMO. I don't feel the Spurs feel any real immediacy to make huge gains with players from this draft. Perceived upside goes into the equation more than current BPA status in a draft like this.

[TD 21]

Yea maybe Jrue is a bit ambitious as a floor. A better, bigger, and more intelligent Marcus Smart then? Either way, I think he's actually one of the safer bets in this draft to become AT LEAST a very good starter for years to come. He has one of the highest ceilings in the draft imo if/when that shot comes around.


compares favorably to this illustrious list: Exum, Ntilikina, Culver, Daniels (too soon), Black (too soon) and to a lesser extent (more true PG's) Payton, Mudiay, Dunn, Hayes and (more wings) Winslow, (Stanley) Johnson, (Josh) Jackson.

Non lottery picks of the past decade include (Bruce) Brown and Mann.

[exstatic]

Thats you though lol (and that’s fine). Not everyone is going to rate guys the same way and we just have to live with that. Fact is, regardless of how much you personally have Reed, Castle over Cody, not every FO will feel that way. That doesnt make it
Im not as high on Castle as most here; I think he has higher bust potential that most give credence to. But I would still be very happy if SA got him too and believed in him.

I like the wings more than all the guards except for Reed *personally*. I would love to walk away with 2 of Holland/Buzelis/Risacher/Cody at 4 and 8 if we dont get Reed. I don’t think that happens, but I would not mind it at all.

It’s funny, because Castle is one of the more complete players in the draft, lacking pretty much only shooting, and you’re worried about his bust potential while advocating for Holland, who has one of the highest bust potentials in this draft.

[exstatic]

Man I think even that is a bit generous of a floor. Smart was a ~35% 3 point shooter on solid volume in his best years…it’s entirely possible Castle doesn’t sniff that if his jumper doesn’t develop.

Smart started out as a flat BAD 3 point shooter. I think he’s a pretty good floor comp. Physical, good defender, point guard-ish.

[SpursBills]

Smart started out as a flat BAD 3 point shooter. I think he’s a pretty good floor comp. Physical, good defender, point guard-ish.

Just to clarify, you’re saying that Stephon Castle is guaranteed to be as good or better as 1 time dpoy, multi time all defense level Marcus smart at the next level?

[Splits]

If he prevents the Spurs from drafting Bustzelis or Salaun, then pull the trigger yesterday. Anything to avoid those 2 losers is a net-positive, idgaf if its at 4 or 8. Just avoid those two pieces of shit who will certainly bust.

[Russ]

Could be.

Will be weird if that's the case IMO. I don't feel the Spurs feel any real immediacy to make huge gains with players from this draft. Perceived upside goes into the equation more than current BPA status in a draft like this.

:flag:


Smart started out as a flat BAD 3 point shooter. I think he’s a pretty good floor comp. Physical, good defender, point guard-ish.

I like Castle a lot, but he just isn't the hard-nosed physical specimen that Smart is.

[3&D_TBH]

Castle should be the pick at 4 if he's there (assuming Risacher is gone). If the somehow Spurs take Cody Williams over Castle, we riot.
Truth. Tbh

[AFBlue]

If Williams is the pick at 4, I will hate-watch the presser where Wright tries to justify the pick with whoever else was still on the board. Sarr, Sheppard, Risacher, Castle...not sure how Williams is objectively better than any of those guys.

[scott]

I'm starting to think this draft might be better than we think, and it just seems so bad because we've all overanalyzed it to death.

Why do I think this? Because the more draft threads I read, the more depressed I become about this draft. :lol

[Chinook]

No, You wrote about free agency and then claimed the Spurs drafted bigs the most of any position group.

First-rounders (that the Spurs drafted for themselves and not sold to another team) during Duncan's career:

PG: 4 (Parker, Udrih, Hill, Joseph)
SG: 1 (Anderson(
SF: 2 (Leonard, Anderson) -- I'm counting Leonard as a drafted player because I don't care he was technically traded
PF: 1 (Jean-Charles)
C: 3 (Mahinmi, Splitter, Miluntinov)

So there definitely seems to be some issues reading what I wrote.

This is ignoring guys like Scola (thread) and Javtokas, Blair and Richards who were also second-rounders drafted during this time because I am not trying to add every pick ever. Blair was the top pick in his draft to whom the Spurs gave a contract equivalent to a first-rounder. Scola and Javtokas were international prospects held in high regard but could be had cheaply back in the day. Anyways, sorry that PG technically beat center out. The Spurs 100 percent never stopped drafting that position despite having David and Tim. You suggested that they went with other players when those two were on the roster together but leave out they only made one first-round selection during that stretch, which was Tony. They sold every other pick. Fuck it, let's look at all the selections from that era:

PG: 1 (Parker)
SG: 2 (Dial, Ginobili)
"Forward": 3 (Carrawell, Hightower, Bracey)
PF: 1 (Scola)
Center: 1 (Javtokas)

So the most frequently draft position was "forward" which is in quotes because it was trio of players who literally never played in the NBA. There really doesn't seem to be a skew away from bigs at that time either.

Regardless, Deeps and I were talking about this draft, and in multiple responses to you I brought up this draft. So you turning this into some idea that I said fit and roster NEVER EVER come into play doesn't make sense. The Spurs lacking talent and having so many open positions do not need to worry about the position. If they draft two PGs and sign another guard this year, and everyone looks good, then it would be much more questionable for them to again target a PG next year. Exceptions could be made, but it would have to be an exception rather than the standard. I'm not sure anyone was arguing that hypothetical.

All that said, because basketball is a sport where backups do play and positional designations are fluid, and because the reality of a salary cap means you have to let players go, there's room for most teams to draft BPA most of the time. Vet teams can draft for the future, and young teams can draft for present competition. The Spurs for years didn't take the draft seriously (which is why they had so few first-rounders for the first 10 or so seasons of Tim's career). Teams don't remain good for 20 years if they don't have a pipeline of talent. They hit a rough patch at the turn of last decade because they had no youth and too many "core" role-players who weren't able to get it done anymore. In the new NBA where players don't take less to stay together, that crunch will hit sooner than it did back then. The team should constantly be looking to backfill its talent with all the picks it has.

tl;dr:

1) The Spurs did draft a lot of centers -- the second most of any position -- during Tim's career.
2) There are scenarios where teams should factor their roster needs into their draft board
3) This draft is not one of those scenarios
4) That we were talking about this draft was apparent in the discussion
5) Basketball is a sport where roster composition matters least in terms of constraining BPA
6) The Spurs should go for BPA as often as possible

[Wilt Chamberlain]

First-rounders (that the Spurs drafted for themselves and not sold to another team) during Duncan's career:

PG: 4 (Parker, Udrih, Hill, Joseph)
SG: 1 (Anderson(
SF: 2 (Leonard, Anderson) -- I'm counting Leonard as a drafted player because I don't care he was technically traded
PF: 1 (Jean-Charles)
C: 3 (Mahinmi, Splitter, Miluntinov)

So there definitely seems to be some issues reading what I wrote.

This is ignoring guys like Scola (thread) and Javtokas, Blair and Richards who were also second-rounders drafted during this time because I am not trying to add every pick ever. Blair was the top pick in his draft to whom the Spurs gave a contract equivalent to a first-rounder. Scola and Javtokas were international prospects held in high regard but could be had cheaply back in the day. Anyways, sorry that PG technically beat center out. The Spurs 100 percent never stopped drafting that position despite having David and Tim. You suggested that they went with other players when those two were on the roster together but leave out they only made one first-round selection during that stretch, which was Tony. They sold every other pick. Fuck it, let's look at all the selections from that era:

PG: 1 (Parker)
SG: 2 (Dial, Ginobili)
"Forward": 3 (Carrawell, Hightower, Bracey)
PF: 1 (Scola)
Center: 1 (Javtokas)

So the most frequently draft position was "forward" which is in quotes because it was trio of players who literally never played in the NBA. There really doesn't seem to be a skew away from bigs at that time either.

Regardless, Deeps and I were talking about this draft, and in multiple responses to you I brought up this draft. So you turning this into some idea that I said fit and roster NEVER EVER come into play doesn't make sense. The Spurs lacking talent and having so many open positions do not need to worry about the position. If they draft two PGs and sign another guard this year, and everyone looks good, then it would be much more questionable for them to again target a PG next year. Exceptions could be made, but it would have to be an exception rather than the standard. I'm not sure anyone was arguing that hypothetical.

All that said, because basketball is a sport where backups do play and positional designations are fluid, and because the reality of a salary cap means you have to let players go, there's room for most teams to draft BPA most of the time. Vet teams can draft for the future, and young teams can draft for present competition. The Spurs for years didn't take the draft seriously (which is why they had so few first-rounders for the first 10 or so seasons of Tim's career). Teams don't remain good for 20 years if they don't have a pipeline of talent. They hit a rough patch at the turn of last decade because they had no youth and too many "core" role-players who weren't able to get it done anymore. In the new NBA where players don't take less to stay together, that crunch will hit sooner than it did back then. The team should constantly be looking to backfill its talent with all the picks it has.

tl;dr:

1) The Spurs did draft a lot of centers -- the second most of any position -- during Tim's career.
2) There are scenarios where teams should factor their roster needs into their draft board
3) This draft is not one of those scenarios
4) That we were talking about this draft was apparent in the discussion
5) Basketball is a sport where roster composition matters least in terms of constraining BPA
6) The Spurs should go for BPA as often as possible

The Spurs drafted 36 players from 1997 to 2014 alone. Try again.

I already pointed out that they started drafting bigs after Robisnon retired and a need was created.

You then go into listing things with no reasoning behind it. Football and it's attrition leads to much much more overturn, for example. You claim basketball's turnover because of a cap makes them most suited for BPA. It's laughable.

You write a whole lot and say very little that is meaningful.

[Chinook]

You write a whole lot and say very little that is meaningful.

Because you seem to not read past the first sentence and then roll your eyes when the questions you ask were already answered in the rest of the post.

The Spurs drafted 11 first-rounders from Tim's second year through his final year. If you want to include Tim's year, then it's 12. Tim retired in 2016, though, so cutting it off in 2014 doesn't make sense. I can only imagine you did so because the Spurs drafted two centers that year. But they knew Tim was leaving soon, so it would've made sense even if they did like you said and avoided drafting centers. I am not cutting that data to be more favorable to me. I am adding in a guy like Leonard who isn't on that list and avoiding players like Leon Smith who is.


I already pointed out that they started drafting bigs after Robisnon retired and a need was created.

I pointed out specifically that they drafted a PF and center before Robinson retired. That was the point of the second list whose reasoning was apparently too obscure. I would be fine if you discounted them second-rounders, but you then pretended like the Spurs' second-rounders should matter with the "36 picks" (which is already misleading, because those picks include selections the Spurs sold to other teams and thus didn't make with any roster considerations in mind). As I pointed out, the Spurs in the Duncan/Robinson era did draft bigs, which makes sense considering Robinson's age and health issues. It simply isn't correct to say they didn't.


Football and it's attrition leads to much much more overturn, for example.

First, yes the NFL has places for back-ups of a lot of positions to play. A number of positions rotate, depending on the team. The Ravens rotated their offensive tackles last year, for example, but kept their ILBs in basically every snap. There are also sub packages and special teams which create a whole different dynamic where depth players will often not be the guys who could fill in the best for the starters but those who can play those auxiliary roles better. The entire way BPA relates to the sport is different.

For example, you wouldn't draft a QB in the first every year if you had a starter in his prime, because only one can play at a time. You focus on keeping the starter healthy, try to develop backups picked later in the draft, maybe have a vet free agent and then don't draft another high until that starter leaves or retires. So certain positions can't really fit into the BPA frame work much of the time, while some (skill positions, CBs, d-lineman, sometimes linebackers) can fit there the majority of the time.


You claim basketball's turnover because of a cap makes them most suited for BPA.

I didn't say "most suited", nor did I compare it to any other sport as terms of how well BPA applies. That is your insertion to try to make your point easier to defend. That said, basketball is much closer to the rotating NFL positions than QBs. Backups play, even if everyone stays healthy. Not only is there an opportunity for back-ups to play, but a team is incentivized to have the best backups they can, because their quality has a large effect on the game. In contrast, a lot of NFL teams will cheap out on backups to every-down positions because of the hard cap and lack of max contracts. Money spent on guys who won't see the field is money that can't be spent on guys who will.

The point I think you're addressing but misunderstanding is me saying that the modern NBA has resulted in teams spending more of their salary on max players and are unable to keep a Spurs-style core together. Stars no longer try to make the numbers work to stay together. Look at the Warriors and Celtics as examples. Unless a team is willing to pay those tax bills (which is even harder under the new CBA), they're going to have to be able to replace guys. Having players who already have development time on long-term contracts helps with that. For example, the Spurs could draft KJ Simpson or Ajay Johnson at 35 to get the system for year before letting Tre Jones walk. That's with me assuming the team will draft a PG with 4 or 8 and with me advocating signing a combo-guard in free agency. Hell, I'd argue that point of draft players with the hopes they'll rise through the rotation as they develop was the main discussion point between Deeps and me.


Try again.

So I don't know if this is just a troll account. You have so few posts over almost over a decade but decided to grace me with a rare handful. It's a gray handle named after a player like a lot of the classic alts. If you're just a person getting back into posting, hopefully I've made my points better now. If you're alt having fun, I guess I hope you learned something. I am not the most informative poster on this site. But these aren't empty words.

[Wilt Chamberlain]

Because you seem to not read past the first sentence.

The Spurs drafted 11 first-rounders from Tim's second year through his final year. If you want to include Tim's year, then it's 12. Tim retired in 2016, though, so cutting it off in 2014 doesn't make sense. I can only imagine you did so because the Spurs drafted two centers that year. But they knew Tim was leaving soon, so it would've made sense even if they did like you said and avoided drafting centers. I am not cutting that data to be more favorable to me. I am adding in a guy like Leonard who isn't on that list and avoiding players like Leon Smith who is.



I pointed out specifically that they drafted a PF and center before Robinson retired. That was the point of the second list whose reasoning was apparently too obscure. I would be fine if you discounted them second-rounders, but you then pretended like the Spurs' second-rounders should matter with the "36 picks" (which is already misleading, because those picks include selections the Spurs sold to other teams and thus didn't make with any roster considerations in mind). As I pointed out, the Spurs in the Duncan/Robinson era did draft bigs, which makes sense considering Robinson's age and health issues. It simply isn't correct to say they didn't.



First, yes the NFL has places for back-ups of a lot of positions to play. A number of positions rotate, depending on the team. The Ravens rotated their offensive tackles last year, for example, but kept their ILBs in basically every snap. There are also sub packages and special teams which create a whole different dynamic where depth players will often not be the guys who could fill in the best for the starters but those who can play those auxiliary roles better. The entire way BPA relates to the sport is different.

For example, you wouldn't draft a QB in the first every year if you had a starter in his prime, because only one can play at a time. You focus on keeping the starter healthy, try to develop backups picked later in the draft, maybe have a vet free agent and then don't draft another high until that starter leaves or retires. So certain positions can't really fit into the BPA frame work much of the time, while some (skill positions, CBs, d-lineman, sometimes linebackers) can fit there the majority of the time.



I didn't say "most suited", nor did I compare it to any other sport as terms of how well BPA applies. That is your insertion to try to make your point easier to defend. That said, basketball is much closer to the rotating NFL positions than QBs. Backups play, even if everyone stays healthy. Not only is there an opportunity for back-ups to play, but a team is incentivized to have the best backups they can, because their quality has a large effect on the game. In contrast, a lot of NFL teams will cheap out on backups to every-down positions because of the hard cap and lack of max contracts. Money spent on guys who won't see the field is money that can't be spent on guys who will.

The point I think you're addressing but misunderstanding is me saying that the modern NBA has resulted in teams spending more of their salary on max players and are unable to keep a Spurs-style core together. Stars no longer try to make the numbers work to stay together. Look at the Warriors and Celtics as examples. Unless a team is willing to pay those tax bills (which is even harder under the new CBA), they're going to have to be able to replace guys. Having players who already have development time on long-term contracts helps with that. For example, the Spurs could draft KJ Simpson or Ajay Johnson at 35 to get the system for year before letting Tre Jones walk. That's with me assuming the team will draft a PG with 4 or 8 and with me advocating signing a combo-guard in free agency. Hell, I'd argue that point of draft players with the hopes they'll rise through the rotation as they develop was the main discussion point between Deeps and me.



So I don't know if this is just a troll account. You have so few posts over almost over a decade but decided to grace me with a rare handful. It's a gray handle named after a player like a lot of the classic alts. If you're just a person getting back into posting, hopefully I've made my points better now. If you're alt having fun, I guess I hope you learned something. I am not the most informative poster on this site. But these aren't empty words.

TLDR.

I will avoid the run on paragraphs and redundancy.

You said first rounders, then you cherry picked second rounders like Scola. You obviously discounted all the draft and stash guys that didn't work out as if that doesn't speak to their draft philosophy. You are all over the place within your word salads.

Taken at face value though, you conclude the top 2 drafted positions to be C and wing. Duncan, Manu, and Parker played G and PF. They are drafting the spots where there are not entrenched starters.

Basketball as a lower injury rate than football, soccer, and hockey. Players play longer and better players play longer than that. IOW, there is much more certainty to plan and you do not need to hedge as much with BPA in case of careers ending unexpectedly.


All that said, because basketball is a sport where backups do play and positional designations are fluid, and because the reality of a salary cap means you have to let players go, there's room for most teams to draft BPA most of the time.

all professional leagues have caps. Of course the NBA does not have a hard cap like some leagues.

The fact of the matter basketball as a sport is better suited for planning and keeping teams together than all others than baseball with their 8+ years of price control on all players.

Picking a 5, with the best C prospect since Jabbar, is stupid.

[Uriel]

Sometimes, I feel like timvp is a secret Spurs agent writing all these articles to throw the scent off their real target, Matas Buzelis.

[scottspurs]

Williams will workout for every team including Atlanta in the top 10 except for houston according to ESPN.

[Chinook]

TLDR.

Why would you brag about that? Are you one of those people that thinks not understanding something is a dunk on someone else?


You said first rounders, then you cherry picked second rounders like Scola. You obviously discounted all the draft and stash guys that didn't work out as if that doesn't speak to their draft philosophy. You are all over the place within your word salads.

I did both first rounders and in a separate list talked about every player drafted during the Duncan/Robinson era. But whether we're talking about 40 percent of 25 percent, there was never an avoidance of bigs.


Taken at face value though, you conclude the top 2 drafted positions to be C and wing.

You're applying a new designation to an older philosophy. Small-forwards and shooting-guards didn't used to be interchangeable, so the concept of drafting "wings", would've made less sense in the earlier parts of the Duncan's career. Regardless, you're mixing up your lists. They drafted three SG/SFs with first-rounders compared to three centers and four point-guards. They weren't drafting with Tony or especially Manu in mind during the Twin Towers era. They were too new and not established, hence why the Spurs immediately tried to sign Jason Kidd in 2003. The "forwards" who were drafted actually played PF in Europe. They weren't draft-and-stashes in the way Scola or Hanga was. They were as far as I can remember Americans who went over ala Thomas and Denmon. They weren't avoiding those positions then and definitely didn't avoid those positions in the Big Three era. Manu was usually a bench player during that time, so they obviously had a starting position open. They filled that position with guys like Barry and struggled for years to figure it out until Danny Green took the spot in 2011.


Basketball as a lower injury rate than football, soccer, and hockey. Players play longer and better players play longer than that. IOW, there is much more certainty to plan and you do not need to hedge as much with BPA in case of careers ending unexpectedly.

Football has a much larger number of incoming players to compensate. Moreover, you seem to be stuck on this idea that backups exist to replace starters, but that's not how it works in the NBA. Backups will play even if the starter is in perfect health. It's like how Danny Green and Manu Ginobili were both valuable and eventually well paid despite both being shooting-guards. You don't typically see starting QBs and their backups both being paid mid-sized and above contracts, because only one is supposed to play. That's sort of why I've never been comparing football to basketball and didn't suggest I was. They're different sports and relate to BPA differently. Football is more restrictive in some ways and less in other ways.


all professional leagues have caps. Of course the NBA does not have a hard cap like some leagues.

Baseball doesn't have a cap, actually. It just has a luxury tax.


The fact of the matter basketball as a sport is better suited for planning and keeping teams together than all others than baseball with their 8+ years of price control on all players.

Have you ever actually looked into the rate of movement for the NBA beyond what you "reckon to be the case"? Ignoring that the new CBA is specifically designed to make keeping teams together harder, I doubt you'll see many 10-man rotations that have stayed together multiple years. The Spurs keeping Parker, Green, Leonard, Duncan, Splitter, Mills, Ginobili and Diaw together from 2011 to 2015 is amazing, and even that's just eight guys with backup PFs and SFs changing. Two years before that window, only the Big Three were on the roster, and two years after Duncan, Splitter and Diaw were all gone. That was with the three stars constantly giving up money to keep things together. Thinking NBA continuity is easy is just wrong, regardless of if it's harder in other sports. There's almost always room for players to break through rotations.


Picking a 5, with the best C prospect since Jabbar, is stupid.

As mentioned before, there's a 20-24 MPG role for a backup center of sufficient quality. That's worth a first-round pick, even ignoring that the Spurs need good trade pieces anyway and shouldn't pass up on talent that can become those pieces.

[Wilt Chamberlain]

Why would you brag about that? Are you one of those people that thinks not understanding something is a dunk on someone else?



I did both first rounders and in a separate list talked about every player drafted during the Duncan/Robinson era. But whether we're talking about 40 percent of 25 percent, there was never an avoidance of bigs.



You're applying a new designation to an older philosophy. Small-forwards and shooting-guards didn't used to be interchangeable, so the concept of drafting "wings", would've made less sense in the earlier parts of the Duncan's career. Regardless, you're mixing up your lists. They drafted three SG/SFs with first-rounders compared to three centers and four point-guards. They weren't drafting with Tony or especially Manu in mind during the Twin Towers era. They were too new and not established, hence why the Spurs immediately tried to sign Jason Kidd in 2003. The "forwards" who were drafted actually played PF in Europe. They weren't draft-and-stashes in the way Scola or Hanga was. They were as far as I can remember Americans who went over ala Thomas and Denmon. They weren't avoiding those positions then and definitely didn't avoid those positions in the Big Three era. Manu was usually a bench player during that time, so they obviously had a starting position open. They filled that position with guys like Barry and struggled for years to figure it out until Danny Green took the spot in 2011.



Football has a much larger number of incoming players to compensate. Moreover, you seem to be stuck on this idea that backups exist to replace starters, but that's not how it works in the NBA. Backups will play even if the starter is in perfect health. It's like how Danny Green and Manu Ginobili were both valuable and eventually well paid despite both being shooting-guards. You don't typically see starting QBs and their backups both being paid mid-sized and above contracts, because only one is supposed to play. That's sort of why I've never been comparing football to basketball and didn't suggest I was. They're different sports and relate to BPA differently. Football is more restrictive in some ways and less in other ways.



Baseball doesn't have a cap, actually. It just has a luxury tax.



Have you ever actually looked into the rate of movement for the NBA beyond what you "reckon to be the case"? Ignoring that the new CBA is specifically designed to make keeping teams together harder, I doubt you'll see many 10-man rotations that have stayed together multiple years. The Spurs keeping Parker, Green, Leonard, Duncan, Splitter, Mills, Ginobili and Diaw together from 2011 to 2015 is amazing, and even that's just eight guys with backup PFs and SFs changing. Two years before that window, only the Big Three were on the roster, and two years after Duncan, Splitter and Diaw were all gone. That was with the three stars constantly giving up money to keep things together. Thinking NBA continuity is easy is just wrong, regardless of if it's harder in other sports. There's almost always room for players to break through rotations.



As mentioned before, there's a 20-24 MPG role for a backup center of sufficient quality. That's worth a first-round pick, even ignoring that the Spurs need good trade pieces anyway and shouldn't pass up on talent that can become those pieces.

TLDR.

It's not a brag. It's a taunt. I have explained why I do not believe it is worth reading your posts. I will demonstrate:

You could have written:

NBA players move around a lot according to metrics. It was a surprise the Spurs could keep together the team for the last championship stretch. However, even then shortly after 2014 Splitter and Boris were gone

Instead we get:


Have you ever actually looked into the rate of movement for the NBA beyond what you "reckon to be the case"? Ignoring that the new CBA is specifically designed to make keeping teams together harder, I doubt you'll see many 10-man rotations that have stayed together multiple years. The Spurs keeping Parker, Green, Leonard, Duncan, Splitter, Mills, Ginobili and Diaw together from 2011 to 2015 is amazing, and even that's just eight guys with backup PFs and SFs changing. Two years before that window, only the Big Three were on the roster, and two years after Duncan, Splitter and Diaw were all gone. That was with the three stars constantly giving up money to keep things together. Thinking NBA continuity is easy is just wrong, regardless of if it's harder in other sports. There's almost always room for players to break through rotations.

You are a terrible writer and the best you will get is a skim.

Now of course, it is a strawman. I said it had a lower injury rate than the other leagues. You respond with tangential nonsense.

You are arguing a standard where the Spurs need to keep the entire roster. My argument is it is easier to keep together than most leagues.

I think your best part was to end with your preference to draft for backups in the NBA lottery. Shows your lack of wisdom well.

[BatManu20]

Trying to talk myself into Cody cause I’m getting the feeling he might be the pick at 8 if he’s on the board tbh.

1803646600046321694

1803929345003786638

[baseline bum]

Trying to talk myself into Cody cause I’m getting the feeling he might be the pick at 8 if he’s on the board tbh.


Yeah wouldn't mind taking a swing at 8 on Williams or maybe Holland. Carter's really low release point on his three scares me; unsure if I'd want him at 8.

[AFBlue]

Between Cody, Holland and Salaun I'm not sure who I like best. Holland and Salaun both bring an intensity and (irrational) confidence, that I just don't think Cody possesses. I like his feel, but the upside swing with the first two just seems bigger.

[Mr. Body]

I never liked Williams much when I watched him. He knew where to be and had good length and smoothness. I'm not worried about his strength; that will get better. What bothered me was how little he impacted games, that he was slow. He has good handles but is glacial to get to his spots. Reluctant and very slow getting his shot off. Very poor rebounder (strength is one thing, effort is another).

One of his marks was his incredible finishing around the rim, which is true. Very high. But they often seemed preposterous, he was constantly getting these crazy shots to go down. Problem was, these were crazy shots. He was constantly contorting himself to get them off - because he's slow, because he's weak - and those are going to get way, way harder in the NBA. If he keeps making such a crazy percentage, great. I don't think it'll happen.

Once he came back from injury, he was nearly unplayable. Colorado was better without him, and his minutes started going down. Maybe he was on a minutes restriction, but even so, he wasn't a first round draft pick at that point.

If it came to a choice at #8, I don't take him. I'm going Dillingham 100%.

[PhantomDashCam]

https://youtu.be/yQ-2i0sY6fA?si=IK0C2nkPmu9s69bJ

[DPG21920]

I am still personally very high on Cody Williams (comparatively in this draft - not like generationally lol). I think many here would be mad if Spurs got him but hes one of my favorites at pick 8 if Spurs stay put.

[CGD]

I am still personally very high on Cody Williams (comparatively in this draft - not like generationally lol). I think many here would be mad if Spurs got him but hes one of my favorites at pick 8 if Spurs stay put.

I’m good with him at 8, if Reed or Castle are the pick at 4. I’ve tried, but I just can’t get there with Saluan.

[mudyez]

I like him as a player and would find it kind of funny, having him go up against his brother in the Chet/Wemby feud (with possibly Salaun joining OKC to add another level).

But listening to the OKC interview made me pause, when he mentioned the Lakers and how he grew up a fan of them. He probably will never become a star, but if so, it gave me "he will not stay" vibes. Because of that, I'd prefer Buzz, Knecht or Salaun and maybe even Da Silva.

[rankingtear]

I like him much like his fellow alumn he is low maintenance guy that fit in any locker room. He also came out as a 50/40 guy with defensive upside. He is the most Dwhite guy in this draft down to the confidence issues. Both don't have an inbetween game as well, a set shot from 3 and good touch at the basket.

[Dejounte]

Enjoyed reading this thread. 10/10

[mystargtr34]

He looks like a smaller, skinnier, weaker Julian Champagnie

[baseline bum]

the more draft threads I read, the more depressed I become about this draft. :lol

Kind of the way I feel about the 2025 draft after Flagg :lol

[Ice009]

So he's nowhere near as good as his brother? I didn't watch Utah, but I was interested at getting him at number 8, but that was mainly due to his brother's play hoping he could be develop somewhere in the vicinity.

[Mr. Body]

I never liked Williams much when I watched him. He knew where to be and had good length and smoothness. I'm not worried about his strength; that will get better. What bothered me was how little he impacted games, that he was slow. He has good handles but is glacial to get to his spots. Reluctant and very slow getting his shot off. Very poor rebounder (strength is one thing, effort is another).

One of his marks was his incredible finishing around the rim, which is true. Very high. But they often seemed preposterous, he was constantly getting these crazy shots to go down. Problem was, these were crazy shots. He was constantly contorting himself to get them off - because he's slow, because he's weak - and those are going to get way, way harder in the NBA. If he keeps making such a crazy percentage, great. I don't think it'll happen.

Once he came back from injury, he was nearly unplayable. Colorado was better without him, and his minutes started going down. Maybe he was on a minutes restriction, but even so, he wasn't a first round draft pick at that point.

If it came to a choice at #8, I don't take him. I'm going Dillingham 100%.

I wasn't ever totally sure about Dillingham. I loved his offense and game nature, but his defense sucked so hard. I always pretty much hated Cody Williams. He never would have gotten print if not for his brother.

[Mr. Body]

I never liked Williams much when I watched him. He knew where to be and had good length and smoothness. I'm not worried about his strength; that will get better. What bothered me was how little he impacted games, that he was slow. He has good handles but is glacial to get to his spots. Reluctant and very slow getting his shot off. Very poor rebounder (strength is one thing, effort is another).

One of his marks was his incredible finishing around the rim, which is true. Very high. But they often seemed preposterous, he was constantly getting these crazy shots to go down. Problem was, these were crazy shots. He was constantly contorting himself to get them off - because he's slow, because he's weak - and those are going to get way, way harder in the NBA. If he keeps making such a crazy percentage, great. I don't think it'll happen.

Once he came back from injury, he was nearly unplayable. Colorado was better without him, and his minutes started going down. Maybe he was on a minutes restriction, but even so, he wasn't a first round draft pick at that point.

If it came to a choice at #8, I don't take him. I'm going Dillingham 100%.

I wasn't ever totally sure about Dillingham. I loved his offense and game nature, but his defense sucked so hard. I always pretty much hated Cody Williams. He never would have gotten print if not for his brother.

[scottspurs]

I remember thinking he could have some T-Mac to his game lol! Turned out to be T-Minus. But also a reminder proper development is super important. He is very young. Not a lost cause but that rookie year was not pretty

[scott]

Kind of the way I feel about the 2025 draft after Flagg :lol

Maybe it’s the joy of having the #1 pick with Victor Wembanyama on the board that is staining all drafts furthermore? :lol

[scott]

Whenever someone bumps an old thread, I love going back and looking at the hypothetical roster constructions people post (including mine)… and I’m glad none of them ever come to fruition, because man some of them are really bad

[pad300]

Maybe it’s the joy of having the #1 pick with Victor Wembanyama on the board that is staining all drafts furthermore? :lol

Yeah, that might be it.

I mean people are complaining about this draft, but if you put this draft and last draft's prospect pools together (as prospects, not after what we've seen in 2024's rookie season), this year's draft would have at minimum the first 4 prospects off the board (Flagg, Harper, Bailey, VJ), and then there'd be a a dogfight... I could see Castle ranking 10th (or later) pick in a combined draft...

IMO this is an above average draft class...

[Chinook]

Whenever someone bumps an old thread, I love going back and looking at the hypothetical roster constructions people post (including mine)… and I’m glad none of them ever come to fruition, because man some of them are really bad

Are you saying Paul George wouldn't be the missing piece to a title right now?

[baseline bum]

Maybe it’s the joy of having the #1 pick with Victor Wembanyama on the board that is staining all drafts furthermore? :lol

Well last year I was thrilled to get #4 since figured Castle would slip there, as ATL and HOU definitely didn't want him so it was between WAS and us. And when Sarr poisoned the well with ATL forcing his way to WAS that basically let Steph fall to us as long as HOU didn't trade the pick. This year unless the Spurs advance to the top 4 I doubt we get Kon at #8 through #10 and can't say I'm too big a fan of anyone other than Kon after the guys who will go top 4. And not a fan of the one guy who might slip (Bailey).

[baseline bum]

Yeah, that might be it.

I mean people are complaining about this draft, but if you put this draft and last draft's prospect pools together (as prospects, not after what we've seen in 2024's rookie season), this year's draft would have at minimum the first 4 prospects off the board (Flagg, Harper, Bailey, VJ), and then there'd be a a dogfight... I could see Castle ranking 10th (or later) pick in a combined draft...

IMO this is an above average draft class...

He won't have a Whitmore level fall but I wouldn't be too surprised to see Bailey drop with his poor shot selection, lack of handles, and a poor man's Keldon level of offensive awareness.

[pad300]

He won't have a Whitmore level fall but I wouldn't be too surprised to see Bailey drop with his poor shot selection, lack of handles, and a poor man's Keldon level of offensive awareness.

That could happen in this draft, yes. But last year, he would have gone #1 overall...

[baseline bum]

That could happen in this draft, yes. But last year, he would have gone #1 overall...

Probably, but no way I'd have taken him over Castle.

[pad300]

Probably, but no way I'd have taken him over Castle.

That's you. NBA GM's took Sarr, Risacher and Reed before Castle...

[rascal]

Well last year I was thrilled to get #4 since figured Castle would slip there, as ATL and HOU definitely didn't want him so it was between WAS and us. And when Sarr poisoned the well with ATL forcing his way to WAS that basically let Steph fall to us as long as HOU didn't trade the pick. This year unless the Spurs advance to the top 4 I doubt we get Kon at #8 through #10 and can't say I'm too big a fan of anyone other than Kon after the guys who will go top 4. And not a fan of the one guy who might slip (Bailey).

Kon will likely be there at 8.

Flagg, Harper, Bailey, VJ, Tre Johnson, Fears and Queen are most likely the top 7 picks.

[ZeusWillJudge]

He HAD the talent to be drafted as high as he was, but he took three nasty injuries in his one year at Colorado. He should have been sidelined, and come back for another season in college. He fractured his wrist, came back and got his orbital bone fractured in practice, came back and suffered a complete ligament tear in his ankle just before the Pac-12 championship. Colorado's medical staff should be run out of town for putting him back on the floor that season. The orbital fracture had left him with double vision and the ankle injury limited his explosiveness (which was never elite) and his offense fell off a cliff. The worst possible thing that could have happened to him was to go to the worst team in the league, with a bunch of defense-optional teammates. Picking him at 10 may not have been any dumber than Orlando taking Chuma Okeke in the first round after his late injury the year before. I kind of liked him with the Spurs second pick because P3 did a lot of kinematic testing on him last summer that showed his rehab was at around 90%, and his data looked a LOT like his brother's. And if I remember right, his combine numbers were better than Jalen's. BUT... I was thinking in terms of him spending a season in the G-League, rehabbing and working his way back.

Right now I could see Utah not picking up their team option for his third year, but then him going to play in Europe for 2-3 seasons and coming back much better. If he isn't shot physically, he's a capable defender who could become a very good defender. But I don't care how well he defends, nobody can shoot sub-.400 from 2P and stay on a roster. From > 3 feet, I think he was worse than Boban. There's just no explanation for how bad his shooting was. Nobody who was high on him could have seen that coming.

[Ice009]

Do you mean he shot less than 40% from 2P range, or that percentage from > 3 feet?