There is Markannen to Spurs Buzz

[exstatic]

He comes to the Spurs knowing that this is his future. He knows he's going to sign. The Spurs don't make the trade unless both parties are agreed on this level.

Does he bring you a pony? That’s so incredibly naive for someone who is a fan of a franchise that has been burned multiple time by players who had an agreement, and then broke it.

[scott]

One other thing that hasn't been mentioned... this might not mean TOO much, but it's a little extra tidbit. I'm sure Pop can talk to Hardy and get all the insight he needs to get a comfort level on the player if there are serious talks.

[baseline bum]

Does he bring you a pony? That’s so incredibly naive for someone who is a fan of a franchise that has been burned multiple time by players who had an agreement, and then broke it.

Lamond Murray got more money from Cleveland than the Spurs could offer with Sean's injury replacement exception. Morris got more money from New York. If the Spurs don't offer Markannen max there's a good chance he would walk, that's why you don't trade for him if you're not willing to give him a five year max deal with max raises.

[Manu&Duncan fan]

The more I think about it, there isn't really a scenario that makes more sense than Markkanen to the Spurs. For any of the sides involved.

For the Spurs, Lauri is probably the best fit available.
For Lauri, playing next to Wemby makes you competitive for the next decade.
For the Jazz, there isn't any other team out there that can give you more.


If PATFO wants it, it should happen, tbh.

It will happen. We just need to be patient and enjoy. Ainge is just trying to get more from Spurs by dragging. Spurts wont bite as they have already made a solid offer, I think.

[benefactor]

Does he bring you a pony? That’s so incredibly naive for someone who is a fan of a franchise that has been burned multiple time by players who had an agreement, and then broke it.
Why are you even in this thread making this argument? He would not even come here without the assurance of an extension. Every single take here is predicated on him being here for the foreseeable future. Are you trying to tell me that this risk is more of a risk than BWrong actually doing something valuable with those picks? Because I will risk Lauris word with the extension tbh

[benefactor]

Lamond Murray got more money from Cleveland than the Spurs could offer with Sean's injury replacement exception. Morris got more money from New York. If the Spurs don't offer Markannen max there's a good chance he would walk, that's why you don't trade for him if you're not willing to give him a five year max deal with max raises.
Exactly. That guarantee gets made before the ink hits the paper

[benefactor]

And if you don't want to give him the max, you are just stupid. He's an All-Star player and that's what they get paid.

[scott]

Does he bring you a pony? That’s so incredibly naive for someone who is a fan of a franchise that has been burned multiple time by players who had an agreement, and then broke it.

I understand this POV, but this is the scars of Kawhi and Marcus Morris allowing it to affect our judgement. Just like we can't look at those scars and be overly fearful that Wemby is going to demand out, we can't look at those scars and scare ourselves out of other moves. This is Jak, Siakam, OG moves (all of which have varying levels of success for other circumstances), but at higher stakes. Just like when you move up from the $5 blackjack table to the $100 blackjack table, the stakes are higher but the way you play the game (if you want to win) should remain the same.

[scott]

So assuming the deal is Graham, Johnson, Sochan and X picks for Mark

That would put the Spurs at about $20.4 Million for 12 players and Mamu's hold. If the Spurs are legit targeting DeRozan, you'd think that would be plenty of space to sign him. Then they'd have to room exception, which I've been using on Osman for convenience

Paul, Jones, Wesley
Vassell, Castle, Branham
DeRozan, Champagnie, Cissoko
Markkanen, Osman, Mamukelashvili
Wembanyama, Collins, Bassey

So two spots open with the room exception outstanding.

To me, that bench needs a ton of help. The starting lineup also have massive "too many cooks in the kitchen" vibes. Moving DeRozan to the bench and bringing up Castle helps with both, though Jones and Collins being shaky shooters means the bench could have spacing issues as well. If we're talking about a one-year deal for DMDR or a team option in the second year, I think it might be a pretty decent experiment that probably has a second year in it if things look promising but could easily tech into a continued rebuild if things fall apart.

I'm not sure I get why Utah would take Graham in this deal without requiring additional (minor) draft compensation - unless it's to meet the salary floor? I still like Castle starting at the 3 in a Lauri scenario, even if it is in a defensive specialist role. Swapping Castle with DDR in that scenario makes a ton of sense for the reason of adding more defensive punch to the starting 5 in addition to giving an offensive focal point to the bench (though I think that Bench unit might look pretty ugly). If you can magically turn Collins into Lopez to give the Bucks cap savings, then that 2nd unit looks a lot better since Lopez can shoot.

[benefactor]

God why am I even talking to you? You are the same guy who didn't know who the starting point guard for the Golden State warriors was.

[baseline bum]

I'm not sure I get why Utah would take Graham in this deal without requiring additional (minor) draft compensation - unless it's to meet the salary floor? I still like Castle starting at the 3 in a Lauri scenario, even if it is in a defensive specialist role. Swapping Castle with DDR in that scenario makes a ton of sense for the reason of adding more defensive punch to the starting 5 in addition to giving an offensive focal point to the bench (though I think that Bench unit might look pretty ugly). If you can magically turn Collins into Lopez to give the Bucks cap savings, then that 2nd unit looks a lot better since Lopez can shoot.

Graham would just be cheap salary fodder. If a deal gets done by Sunday Utah can cut him and only owe like $2.85 million while he'd count for $12 million in the trade for cap puroses. Long shot to get a deal done that quickly but the Spurs could just give Utah $3 million or a couple of seconds to make up for it and not have to dig into cap space too much for a Markannen trade.

[scott]

Graham would just be cheap salary fodder. If a deal gets done by Sunday Utah can cut him and only owe like $2.85 million while he'd count for $12 million in the trade for cap puroses. Long shot to get a deal done that quickly but the Spurs could just give Utah $3 million to make up for it and not have to dig into cap space too much for a Markannen trade.

But if you are sending Johnson and Sochan, Graham isn't needed for any of that. He's just unnecessary. Johnson alone is enough matching salary, let alone if you add in Sochan. In fact, the trade fails because of Graham.

https://i.ibb.co/x62Xbkd/Screenshot-2024-07-04-151517.png

[scott]

It works on this trade machine (I assume because Utah takes the excess into cap space), but again - it's not necessary so I don't get why Utah would allow him to be included?

https://i.ibb.co/cTBYXky/Screenshot-2024-07-04-151804.png

[baseline bum]

But if you are sending Johnson and Sochan, Graham isn't needed for any of that. He's just unnecessary. Johnson alone is enough matching salary, let alone if you add in Sochan. In fact, the trade fails because of Graham.


My bad, missed that this was a trade with Keldon. Yeah Graham is useless in any trade with Keldon unless the Spurs are say taking John Collins back too.

[Chinook]

The point of Graham being included is to save the Spurs cap space they'll need to fill put their roster. No matter how much weight one wants to put into VORP, Keldon provides production that would have to be replaced. The Spurs can hope a team like Detroit is willing to take Graham for some seconds, or they can just include him here along with those seconds and cash.

[Knoxxx]

God why am I even talking to you? You are the same guy who didn't know who the starting point guard for the Golden State warriors was.

Lolz-really?!?

[Wilt Chamberlain]

The point of Graham being included is to save the Spurs cap space they'll need to fill put their roster. No matter how much weight one wants to put into VORP, Keldon provides production that would have to be replaced. The Spurs can hope a team like Detroit is willing to take Graham for some seconds, or they can just include him here along with those seconds and cash.

The moment they make this trade they are strategically tanking. They do not want 2025 production at that point. They want a bottom 4 result.

Young players with significant growth potential like Vassell or Sochan are the only players that make sense to interest Utah.

[John B]

Lamond Murray got more money from Cleveland than the Spurs could offer with Sean's injury replacement exception. Morris got more money from New York. If the Spurs don't offer Markannen max there's a good chance he would walk, that's why you don't trade for him if you're not willing to give him a five year max deal with max raises.

I doubt it’s all about getting the max, but also the chance of winning it all, which he could with Wemby, while helping the franchise get more help if he helps with a discounted salary if ever. He knows Wemby gets the Max, but hopefully he knows that the Spurs is a small market who could only afford so much, yet found championships with the Big 3, worked out with their salaries to keep a competitive team. I’m sure the Spurs will communicate that and Markkanen will be okay to that, if that’s the case.

He’s an international player which historically bodes well with Spurs culture of doing things, I assume.

[scott]

The point of Graham being included is to save the Spurs cap space they'll need to fill put their roster. No matter how much weight one wants to put into VORP, Keldon provides production that would have to be replaced. The Spurs can hope a team like Detroit is willing to take Graham for some seconds, or they can just include him here along with those seconds and cash.

Gotcha, understand - was just curious why he was included. I’d assume Spurs would have to also send the cash to cover Graham’s guarantee in this scenario, or compensate Utah some other way (maybe that was in the “X Picks” portion)

[baseline bum]

I doubt it’s all about getting the max, but also the chance of winning it all, which he could with Wemby, while helping the franchise get more help if he helps with a discounted salary if ever. He knows Wemby gets the Max, but hopefully he knows that the Spurs is a small market who could only afford so much, yet found championships with the Big 3, worked out with their salaries to keep a competitive team. I’m sure the Spurs will communicate that and Markkanen will be okay to that, if that’s the case.

He’s an international player which historically bodes well with Spurs culture of doing things, I assume.

It's about the money. You can't compare the situations since Manu and Tony took less to keep a champion together while Markannen would be the main acquisition next to Wemby to make title contention possible. If you're trading for Markannen it has to be with the realization that you're either giving him the 5 year max or you just pissed away assets on a rental.

[exstatic]

Why are you even in this thread making this argument? He would not even come here without the assurance of an extension. Every single take here is predicated on him being here for the foreseeable future. Are you trying to tell me that this risk is more of a risk than BWrong actually doing something valuable with those picks? Because I will risk Lauris word with the extension tbh

That’s exactly what I’m saying.

[Knoxxx]

It's about the money. You can't compare the situations since Manu and Tony took less to keep a champion together while Markannen would be the main acquisition next to Wemby to make title contention possible. If you're trading for Markannen it has to be with the realization that you're either giving him the 5 year max or you just pissed away assets on a rental.

It’s not like max salary deals on the Wemby train are going to be common, get it while you can Lauri!

[baseline bum]

That’s exactly what I’m saying.

So much less of a risk that Markannen leaves $70 million on the table than it is the Spurs draft another Primo, another Sochan, and take Vassell over Haliburton with those Atlanta picks/swaps.

[spurraider21]

we are not signing him as the main shotblocker. People here are saying he's a bad defender, but can't point out what he's actually bad at. He's 7 feet tall, mobile enough to guard on the perimeter and strong enough to guard bigs in the post. So what is he bad at? Y'all act like he's Tre Young. He plays PF and SF, not C.
He is a subpar defender. He’s not branham/keldon bad at his position but he’s not what you want. Yes he had athletic traits to make splash plays on highlight reels here and there but it’s not reflective of his level of play on a consistent basis

[DPG21920]

I think we are at a place where no one is really going to change their mind. I'm with scott and LeBowen with the belief that we really can't trust this front office with draft assets when it comes to picking players and it's better to go ahead and trade for a player like Lauri. I don't think you waste them...it's more about being opportunistic. I understand DPG even if I don't agree with him. You want to hold out hope that this front office will be able to take its head out of its ass and pick the players that this team needs to succeed with the assets we have acquired.

At the end of the day it's a very hard call. I saw DPG say he thinks it's a 70% chance those pics will pan out in some way. I honestly think it's closer to 50/50. I worry about this franchise's ability to judge talent. They were too scared to take anyone at number 8 and just traded the pick away instead. How can I trust them with the future picks we own? I and many others are of the opinion that there were players worth taking and the future might show that. As far as building from where we are now goes, Lauri looks like a step in the right direction. You know for a fact you are getting a good player. Perhaps the future will tell a different tale and some better player will get picked with the pick that we traded. It's a risk you take. But from where I stand, it's the risk that needs to be taken.

To be fair, my 70% call was not just via draft with those assets. It was a combination of draft + other trades that may shake loose. Im just of the opinion, especially when factoring in new CBA and limitations that there will always be Lauri types available to over pay for hence no rush.

Give yourself a chance to draft that star (by far best case scnaerio a la OKC) but even if that doesnt work, theres always another Lauri (yes, I know the “hey man you keep saying that but list the next for sure Lauri if not Lauri” crowd doesnt agree - but im not going off who we know is available but the fact that we have seen every year or two multiple all stars shake loose even those we weren’t thinking about).

So its not just draft but the fact that Lauri isnt good enough to go all in for (even if I would be very happy to land him in context) and that I feel pretty confident that there will be players of similar caliber ready to be traded for after we have even more data on Sochan/Dev/Castle/Keldon etc.. and that even if all those guys nuke their value, we have so many picks we can still do a similar overpay deal for a Lauri type player next season but at least we gave ourselves a chance to see how the draft picks turn out and our core guys…

But make no mistake; ive been vocal about CP + Castle alone being an unacceptable off season

[DPG21920]

https://youtu.be/ZRkiX8SDiVM?feature=shared

I believe Don Harris is an insider, have seen him break news before.

he says it could be Jeremy + Keldon + 1 first round pick that’s not an ATL pick

IF that’s the case I have no issue for it especially because I value Keldon as a late lottery pick in a good draft and a top 5-10 in a draft like we just saw. Sochan I love and I personally want on the team and believe in, but if you get Lauri, it does phase him out as starter (and I view him as a lottery pick in terms of compensation).

[baseline bum]

Give yourself a chance to draft that star (by far best case scnaerio a la OKC)

OKC traded for their star and nakedly tanked for their #2 and #3 guys. You want the Spurs to win 22 games again?

[DPG21920]

OKC traded for their star and nakedly tanked for their #2 and #3 guys. You want the Spurs to win 22 games again?

We traded for our star (Wemby via DJ+White+DeRozan deals) - its not different

[spurraider21]

I don’t think this is happening. Spurs probably called and were involved early. As soon as it became a bidding war Ainge probably set the price sky high to the point it probably doesn’t make sense for us anymore.

[DPG21920]

Also the “DPG only wants to win a deal” crowd is strawmanning so hard. I dont give a shit about “winning” a deal. Context matters here and I wont let you gaslight me otherwise :lol

Im fine paying 1000000 million dollars and 29 firsts for the right guy. I dont think Lauri is that guy NOR do I think its the right time to take that swing (but especially for a player like him).

If it were Luka or Ant man? Cool. Pummel the spurs and do what it takes. This isnt that situation, he isnt that player and patience is warranted due to opportunity costs and risk/reward.

[DPG21920]

I don’t think this is happening. Spurs probably called and were involved early. As soon as it became a bidding war Ainge probably set the price sky high to the point it probably doesn’t make sense for us anymore.

Good for Spurs. That is smart and aligns with what they’ve said and what they are signaling. Pivot to Cam or Simone Fontecchio and keep the guns loaded for 25’

[baseline bum]

Good for Spurs. That is smart and aligns with what they’ve said and what they are signaling. Pivot to Cam or Simone Fontecchio and keep the guns loaded for 25’

You can only play five guys at once; that's why 4 quarters are never worth one dollar when it comes to NBA rosters. Cam Johnson is the kind of guy you get to plug holes in a contending roster, not another foundational piece to build around which is what the Spurs need to put next to Victor.

[DPG21920]

You can only play five guys at once; that's why 4 quarters are never worth one dollar when it comes to NBA rosters. Cam Johnson is the kind of guy you get to plug holes in a contending roster, not another foundational piece to build around which is what the Spurs need to put next to Victor.

Opposite IMO. Spurs aren’t contending with Lauri so you dont pay insane prices for him. He’s not some missing piece you can justify over paying for because hes a great fit and puts you over the top.

Right now, Spurs need base hits to help with unlocking Wemby/Dev etc…and keeping all the main assets to get Wemby a legit running mate; not Lauri

[spurraider21]

Opposite IMO. Spurs aren’t contending with Lauri so you dont pay insane prices for him. He’s not some missing piece you can justify over paying for because hes a great fit and puts you over the top.

Right now, Spurs need base hits to help with unlocking Wemby/Dev etc…and keeping all the main assets to get Wemby a legit running mate; not Lauri
his point is Lauri is good enough to be considered a foundational piece you can continue building around whereas cam Johnson is more of a “finishing touch” type player

[DPG21920]

his point is Lauri is good enough to be considered a foundational piece you can continue building around whereas cam Johnson is more of a “finishing touch” type player

But hes not is my point. Lauri is the type of guy you get as icing on the cake where you know you are overpaying but hes good enough to put a really good team missing a very specific thing over the top.

Now, again, if you can get him at a very reasonable price where you have all your best young players + best pristine draft picks to build around that fact? Sure you grab him and be happy.

[DPG21920]

Cam is a less expensive stop gap that fills a need to move team forward and make life easier with zero risk because he retains value that you can trade later to get the piece that is a legit part of the future.

[baseline bum]

Opposite IMO. Spurs aren’t contending with Lauri so you dont pay insane prices for him. He’s not some missing piece you can justify over paying for because hes a great fit and puts you over the top.

Right now, Spurs need base hits to help with unlocking Wemby/Dev etc…and keeping all the main assets to get Wemby a legit running mate; not Lauri

You keep acting like trading for Markkanen is the risky path while using those assets in the draft instead doesn't carry major risk. I think you're dead wrong. Markannen you know you're getting something really nice. Those three Atlanta picks/swap could be around #10 if they don't dump Trae so it's not like the OKC model where they tanked and got Chet #2 to put next to SGA. The last three picks the Spurs made in that 10ish range were Sochan, Vassell, and Primo. One complete bust in Primo, one guy in Vassell who is pretty good offensively but no Markannen and only marginally better defensively than Lauri, and one guy Sochan who is a pretty bad player two years in but has some potential to grow into maybe being a defensive ace. Or he could bust; it could go either way with Jeremy. I'd rather have the bird in the hand and have this team start playing meaningful playoff games, and I have never even suggested giving up all three Atlanta picks/swap to get Markannen.

[KobesAchilles]

Remember, he wanted to trade down if it came to picking Reed Shepperd
He also wouldnt trade for Luka if I remember correctly

[DPG21920]

You keep acting like trading for Markkanen is the risky path while using those assets in the draft instead doesn't carry major risk. I think you're dead wrong. Markannen you know you're getting something really nice. Those three Atlanta picks/swap could be around #10 if they don't dump Trae so it's not like the OKC model where they tanked and got Chet #2 to put next to SGA. The last three picks the Spurs made in that 10ish range were Sochan, Vassell, and Primo. One complete bust in Primo, one guy in Vassell who is pretty good offensively but no Markannen and only marginally better defensively than Lauri, and one guy Sochan who is a pretty bad player two years in but has some potential to grow into maybe being a defensive ace. Or he could bust; it could go either way with Jeremy. I'd rather have the bird in the hand and have this team start playing meaningful playoff games, and I have never even suggested giving up all three Atlanta picks/swap to get Markannen.

Still worth it. Risk/Reward is you get lucky and get a top 4 pick and worst case is you get a Vassell. Lauri isnt so much better than Vassell that you punt a chance at better than Vassell for him. And that’s just the draft. If you keep all your 2025 picks and then decide you need a “Lauri” type, you still have all the capital you need to get a deal like that done. So the ONLY risk is overpaying for Lauri here; not the other way around.

You may not have suggested giving up all ATL picks, but collectively in terms of value so many here have argued giving up that level of picks for him. Thats what Im arguing.

Reasonable price? Get him. Overpay just to improve some? No. Im out.

[scott]

Also the “DPG only wants to win a deal” crowd is strawmanning so hard. I dont give a shit about “winning” a deal. Context matters here and I wont let you gaslight me otherwise :lol

Im fine paying 1000000 million dollars and 29 firsts for the right guy. I dont think Lauri is that guy NOR do I think its the right time to take that swing (but especially for a player like him).

If it were Luka or Ant man? Cool. Pummel the spurs and do what it takes. This isnt that situation, he isnt that player and patience is warranted due to opportunity costs and risk/reward.

You can say this all you want, but I read your posts man :lol

It's easy to say that you're willing to give up everything for guys who aren't available and assets we don't have. I'd happy pay $1billion to own the White House. Never mind that I don't have a billion and the White House ain't for sale.

Every trade proposal you throw out is an underpay, and no one is ever good enough. Its as predictable as the sun rising. Its completely fine - I still otherwise enjoy your takes, but its who you are. I mean shit, you think Keldon is worth a lottery pick, but actual good players aren't worth their value. These aren't things we make up... these are things you write down. :lol

[DPG21920]

You can say this all you want, but I read your posts man :lol

It's easy to say that you're willing to give up everything for guys who aren't available and assets we don't have. I'd happy pay $1billion to own the White House. Never mind that I don't have a billion and the White House ain't for sale.

Every trade proposal you throw out is an underpay, and no one is ever good enough. Its as predictable as the sun rising. Its completely fine - I still otherwise enjoy your takes, but its who you are.

Nah. You view it as an underpay because you’re horny and desperate. I view them, as do many, as completely rational and reasonable. You’re the type that goes into buying a home saying “I have a budget of X” but when you like a house a lot you get caught up in saying “I will go out to eat less and we have to out bid these people” even though its way beyond the budget you set going into it :lol

I love you though (being serious - I enjoy talking ball with you)

[Chinook]

Gotcha, understand - was just curious why he was included. I’d assume Spurs would have to also send the cash to cover Graham’s guarantee in this scenario, or compensate Utah some other way (maybe that was in the “X Picks” portion)

I said "X picks" because from the angle I was taking on the situation (cap space), it didn't matter if it was one pick or five picks. If it's closer to the latter, I could consider the extra salary to basically be a rounding error in the value exchange. What mattered was the net outgoing salary. If the Spurs could get whomever they want (DeRozan or another player) for $18 Million just as easily as they could for $21 Million, I guess it wouldn't really be a positive for them to include Graham. But they would be able to figure that out before the trade.

[Chinook]

The moment they make this trade they are strategically tanking. They do not want 2025 production at that point. They want a bottom 4 result.

Young players with significant growth potential like Vassell or Sochan are the only players that make sense to interest Utah.

Or players they could flip. Keldon showed he wouldn't stop a tank, but I would assume he wouldn't be in the deal if the Jazz were apathetic or against it. Johnson has more value to the Spurs as a player than a trade piece. However, the hypothetical scenario I was responding to had Keldon and Sochan as the outgoing players in the Markkanen deal. That's why I included him. The Spurs have the ability to basically take Mark into cap space, so they don't actually need to trade any particular ballast like so many ideas in this thread include.

[scott]

Throwing a pick away for fucking Cam Johnson at this stage is dumber than giving up 6 picks for Lauri. A roster construction built around Wemby+Lauri+Dev gets you into the playoffs. A roster construction built around Wemby+Dev+Cam Johsnon gets you from 22 wins to 28 wins. We either need to commit to another year of tanking where we get a high pick, or we need to make the improvement worth it by getting to play-in/play-off range to get the experience.

And should a Wemby+Dev+Cam Johnson lineup construction actually prove to get you to that play-in/play-off range... then it's because Wemby and Dev have taken an even bigger leap than expected, in which case you'll have been better off having Lauri to take you even further. This isn't that complicated.

[Chinook]

Nah. You view it as an underpay because you’re horny and desperate. I view them, as do many, as completely rational and reasonable. You’re the type that goes into buying a home saying “I have a budget of X” but when you like a house a lot you get caught up in saying “I will go out to eat less and we have to out bid these people” even though its way beyond the budget you set going into it :lol

I love you though (being serious - I enjoy talking ball with you)

I don't think it's fair to say you're being objective. I think that's the easiest way to not notice your biases. Like for example, I'd say my view on Markkanen is way more complex now than it was a month ago. I've sort of grown to love and hate him. I have spent so much brain power worrying about him that I really want it to have meant something to the team's future. But at the same time, I'm so sick of thinking about Markkanen that I almost hope the Jazz trades him to Detroit so we can be done with it.

[baseline bum]

Still worth it. Risk/Reward is you get lucky and get a top 4 pick and worst case is you get a Vassell. Lauri isnt so much better than Vassell that you punt a chance at better than Vassell for him. And that’s just the draft. If you keep all your 2025 picks and then decide you need a “Lauri” type, you still have all the capital you need to get a deal like that done. So the ONLY risk is overpaying for Lauri here; not the other way around.

You may not have suggested giving up all ATL picks, but collectively in terms of value so many here have argued giving up that level of picks for him. Thats what Im arguing.

Reasonable price? Get him. Overpay just to improve some? No. Im out.

No worst case is you get Primos and Sochans. Not so lucky, not so unlucky case you get a Vassell with one of the picks. Even if you get lucky and land a top 4 there's still plenty of chance you get a Derrick Williams or even worse a James Wiseman. Markannen you know what you're getting, and that's a guy probably good enough to be a #2 option on a good team. You can tank for draft position when you have nothing to lose, when your core is Keldon Johnson and Vassell and you're not going anywhere anyways; doesn't make sense to when you have the guy who has shown himself to be the best young player we have seen in 25-30 years. Moving assets for Markannen isn't rushing things. Moving them for someone like Kevin Durant would be since you'd have to win right now making that move, but Markannen will likely be in his prime for entire contract the Spurs would give him plus the year he'd be on his current deal. Your reasonable price can't be hey Ainge, bend over, because he can do better elsewhere.

[Chinook]

At some point we're going have to reckon with the possibility that Sochan was a perfectly fine selection but that the coaching staff is horrible at developing talent. It sucks that he's losing this summer to international play after already losing last summer to the stupid PG thing. I think a competent staff would've had him working on his strengths, and he'd look about where you'd expect.

[DPG21920]

Throwing a pick away for fucking Cam Johnson at this stage is dumber than giving up 6 picks for Lauri. A roster construction built around Wemby+Lauri+Dev gets you into the playoffs. A roster construction built around Wemby+Dev+Cam Johsnon gets you from 22 wins to 28 wins. We either need to commit to another year of tanking where we get a high pick, or we need to make the improvement worth it by getting to play-in/play-off range to get the experience.

And should a Wemby+Dev+Cam Johnson lineup construction actually prove to get you to that play-in/play-off range... then it's because Wemby and Dev have taken an even bigger leap than expected, in which case you'll have been better off having Lauri to take you even further. This isn't that complicated.

I highly disagree that giving up Keldon and/or Sochan + picks gets SA into the playoffs with Lauri. Who are spurs leaping - go ahead and game that out. Beyond that, even if SA was a play-in team and snuck in great. But what matters more to me is development and you can do that without Lauri IMO

[scott]

Nah. You view it as an underpay because you’re horny and desperate. I view them, as do many, as completely rational and reasonable. You’re the type that goes into buying a home saying “I have a budget of X” but when you like a house a lot you get caught up in saying “I will go out to eat less and we have to out bid these people” even though its way beyond the budget you set going into it :lol

I love you though (being serious - I enjoy talking ball with you)

As someone who has bought and sold a lot of houses - and created a lot of personal wealth from those transactions - I'm the opposite. I've never bought at the top of my budget and I've always gotten value that creates near instant equity. And that's the same approach here. I'm not focused on the price of Lauri, I'm focused on the value. And at the deal I've proposed (which is only a SA28 different from the deal you have proposed, which unless things are going very poorly, should be a pick in the mid 20s. I'm not going to let a Blake Wesley get in the way of closing the deal) in my mind creates the value.

At the end of the day, it obviously is about the perceived value of the player. I see a highly efficient 7-footer who has routinely posted 50/40/90 seasons and averages 24pts and 8reb. It's not like those are flukes either, he's almost a career 50/40/90 guy, and he only got more efficient with increased volume. Are there durability concerns? Yes, but I feel comfortable with those based on how he's been shut down two years in a row to tank. Are there defensive questions? Yes, but I feel comfortable with those based on the rest of the roster construction.

But anyway, I'm not going to convince you otherwise and that is fine. Maybe we'll get lucky in the draft and get a guy who maybe can become a 50/40/90 guy on his own. We probably won't be getting a 7-foot wing who posts 50/40/90 - because those are pretty rare.

I look at a guy like Jabari Smith Jr, who went #3 and was talked about going #1 in a pretty strong class at the top of the draft... and his 99% offensive outcome is... Lauri Markkanen. I'll take the sure thing every time.

[DPG21920]

I don't think it's fair to say you're being objective. I think that's the easiest way to not notice your biases. Like for example, I'd say my view on Markkanen is way more complex now than it was a month ago. I've sort of grown to love and hate him. I have spent so much brain power worrying about him that I really want it to have meant something to the team's future. But at the same time, I'm so sick of thinking about Markkanen that I almost hope the Jazz trades him to Detroit so we can be done with it.

What’s not objective in your view? Have I ever said he sucks? Have I ever said theres no scenario or price where he’s worth it? Hell, have I even never said theres no scenario where I see Spurs overpaying and offering Sochan + Keldon + multiple picks to get it done?

Bias to me is acting like theres no other way to think but your own; I never did that here. I simply have my opinion while fully acknowledging SA may view this entirely different than me and even proposing what I believe (even in Scotts words) to be deals that may get it done that I would STRONGLY dislike.

[DPG21920]

As someone who has bought and sold a lot of houses - and created a lot of personal wealth from those transactions - I'm the opposite. I've never bought at the top of my budget and I've always gotten value that creates near instant equity. And that's the same approach here. I'm not focused on the price of Lauri, I'm focused on the value. And at the deal I've proposed (which is only a SA28 different from the deal you have proposed, which unless things are going very poorly, should be a pick in the mid 20s. I'm not going to let a Blake Wesley get in the way of closing the deal) in my mind creates the value.

At the end of the day, it obviously is about the perceived value of the player. I see a highly efficient 7-footer who has routinely posted 50/40/90 seasons and averages 24pts and 8reb. It's not like those are flukes either, he's almost a career 50/40/90 guy, and he only got more efficient with increased volume. Are there durability concerns? Yes, but I feel comfortable with those based on how he's been shut down two years in a row to tank. Are there defensive questions? Yes, but I feel comfortable with those based on the rest of the roster construction.

But anyway, I'm not going to convince you otherwise and that is fine. Maybe we'll get lucky in the draft and get a guy who maybe can become a 50/40/90 guy on his own. We probably won't be getting a 7-foot wing who posts 50/40/90 - because those are pretty rare.

I look at a guy like Jabari Smith Jr, who went #3 and was talked about going #1 in a pretty strong class at the top of the draft... and his 99% offensive outcome is... Lauri Markkanen. I'll take the sure thing every time.

What I find incongruent is you saying Im biased while simultaneously admitting I proposed deals that aren’t that far off from yours.

[DPG21920]

Jabari has 10x the defensive potential as Lauri. This cannot be simply handwaived. Nor can his level of assisted buckets and FT rate/self creation for supposed offensive hubs etc…

[DPG21920]

No worst case is you get Primos and Sochans. Not so lucky, not so unlucky case you get a Vassell with one of the picks. Even if you get lucky and land a top 4 there's still plenty of chance you get a Derrick Williams or even worse a James Wiseman. Markannen you know what you're getting, and that's a guy probably good enough to be a #2 option on a good team. You can tank for draft position when you have nothing to lose, when your core is Keldon Johnson and Vassell and you're not going anywhere anyways; doesn't make sense to when you have the guy who has shown himself to be the best young player we have seen in 25-30 years. Moving assets for Markannen isn't rushing things. Moving them for someone like Kevin Durant would be since you'd have to win right now making that move, but Markannen will likely be in his prime for entire contract the Spurs would give him plus the year he'd be on his current deal. Your reasonable price can't be hey Ainge, bend over, because he can do better elsewhere.

Im not paying 4-5 firsts and young players and 40M on the “maybe hes a number 2”. If you’re paying that price alongside forgoing draft potential and other trades you cannot guess. Not with this roster currently.

[DPG21920]

As someone who has bought and sold a lot of houses - and created a lot of personal wealth from those transactions - I'm the opposite. I've never bought at the top of my budget and I've always gotten value that creates near instant equity. And that's the same approach here. I'm not focused on the price of Lauri, I'm focused on the value. And at the deal I've proposed (which is only a SA28 different from the deal you have proposed, which unless things are going very poorly, should be a pick in the mid 20s. I'm not going to let a Blake Wesley get in the way of closing the deal) in my mind creates the value.

At the end of the day, it obviously is about the perceived value of the player. I see a highly efficient 7-footer who has routinely posted 50/40/90 seasons and averages 24pts and 8reb. It's not like those are flukes either, he's almost a career 50/40/90 guy, and he only got more efficient with increased volume. Are there durability concerns? Yes, but I feel comfortable with those based on how he's been shut down two years in a row to tank. Are there defensive questions? Yes, but I feel comfortable with those based on the rest of the roster construction.

But anyway, I'm not going to convince you otherwise and that is fine. Maybe we'll get lucky in the draft and get a guy who maybe can become a 50/40/90 guy on his own. We probably won't be getting a 7-foot wing who posts 50/40/90 - because those are pretty rare.

I look at a guy like Jabari Smith Jr, who went #3 and was talked about going #1 in a pretty strong class at the top of the draft... and his 99% offensive outcome is... Lauri Markkanen. I'll take the sure thing every time.

Well me too. I buy and sell homes and have done well and been fair. So I feel my approach is more than justified.

[RC_Drunkford]

He is a subpar defender. He’s not branham/keldon bad at his position but he’s not what you want. Yes he had athletic traits to make splash plays on highlight reels here and there but it’s not reflective of his level of play on a consistent basis

He‘s also 7 feet tall. And his C‘s were Kelly Olynyk and John Collins, both players who ain’t shotblockers

[objective]

Something people don't seem to consider when comparing proposals to the Dejounte trade, and differently with the N.O. Dejounte trade ...

Spurs got the picks, sure, but few ever remember that they had to eat a load of dead salary in a washed and torn knee Danilo Gallinari. They cut him but still had to eat over 10 million in dead money because he couldn't even play anymore.

That's why Atlanta gave so much in draft capital (not enough imo), is they weren't sending useful players or promising prospects. There was no Okongwu in the deal.

If Keldon is in any deal, that knocks a pick out of the deal at least. Even when New Orleans traded for Dejounte and people talked about how cheap it was on the pick side, they ignored that Atlanta got Nance and Daniels, who were at least 20 minutes a game role players who could contribute or moved later, unlike Gallinari.

Even Zollins can at least play and take up minutes, he's not elderly or injured & out for the season.

Any matching salary players need to be accounted for fairly in a trade. Seeing stuff like Keldon and 4-6 firsts is joke. Gobert at least was a Hall of Fame defensive player, Markannen is being overvalued

[baseline bum]

Im not paying 4-5 firsts and young players and 40M on the “maybe hes a number 2”. If you’re paying that price alongside forgoing draft potential and other trades you cannot guess. Not with this roster currently.

I forgot what you'd pay for him. Are you in that fair price for him is two lottery protected firsts + Keldon crowd? I personally like Scott's proposal of 26 Spurs pick with unprotected ATL swap, 28 Spurs pick with top 1 protected BOS swap, 30 Spurs with unprotected DAL swap / top 1 protected MIN swap, 31 Minnesota unprotected + salary ballast, but I'd pivot to changing that 28 Spurs pick to the 27 Atlanta if it has to be done.

[scott]

What I find incongruent is you saying Im biased while simultaneously admitting I proposed deals that aren’t that far off from yours.

I never said you were biased (that might have been somewhere else). I said you seem to value winning deals on an individual basis above the bigger picture. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just an observation I made going back to last offseason. With every trade, it seems like you were really focused on extracting maximum value out of each deal.

What I'm suggesting is that for a move like Lauri (or whomever the top target is going to be), I'm okay losing a little value on the deal, because the true value doesn't come from saving an extra mid-20s FRP, it comes from making Wemby + Lauri + Devin + Castle + SA25 + ATL25 my long term core. I don't care if I lose out on an extra Blake Wesley, because that is easily replaced.

On deals like Cam Payne or Reggie Bullock, I agree, getting as much value out of the deal itself is important, because there is no other intrinsic value - you HAVE to get the value up front. But with Lauri (or insert player of your choice), the price isn't as important because the real long-term value comes elsewhere. To use the house example, it's like haggling over $5,000 on a house that's $100,000 under market. I'm not going to let that last $5,000 kill the deal where because I'm only getting $95k of instant equity instead of $100k.

A more adept example would be from what I do in real life, which involves buying and selling businesses. If a deal creates long term strategic value FAR in excess of the price, then haggling over long-term rounding errors isn't the name of the game.

But, if you don't think Lauri is worth it - that is fine. I disagree. I think a 7-footer with his offensive skillset is rare. I don't need him to be a defensive stud, only passable (which I think he is) and I think his defensive metrics would vastly improve in a lineup with CP3-Devin-Castle-Wemby. I don't need a team with five all-defense guys, and I think the lineup I'm proposing would be a pretty damn formidable defensive unit because of the way they fit together.

[scott]

Theres ZERO chance IMO spurs trade all the ATL picks (and especially alongside the MIN picks) for Lauri. They would be idiots to do so.

ATL 25 + MIN 31 + MIN 30 swap and a player. Thats it (outside of seconds or something like CHA pick)

This is the DPG best offer I was thinking of. I actually wouldn't do the ATL25.

But really the main difference between him and I is that SA28 pick (which I think should be valued in the mid20s).

I also have Collins being the ballast in mine, and if they want Keldon instead of Collins then SA26 becomes a swap instead of a pick.

In reality though, I'd probably still do those 4 picks I mentioned plus Keldon, because I personally don't rate Keldon that highly. I do recognize that he fills an important role, it's just a role I think we could easily replace.

[DPG21920]

I never said you were biased (that might have been somewhere else). I said you seem to value winning deals on an individual basis above the bigger picture. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just an observation I made going back to last offseason. With every trade, it seems like you were really focused on extracting maximum value out of each deal.

What I'm suggesting is that for a move like Lauri (or whomever the top target is going to be), I'm okay losing a little value on the deal, because the true value doesn't come from saving an extra mid-20s FRP, it comes from making Wemby + Lauri + Devin + Castle + SA25 + ATL25 my long term core. I don't care if I lose out on an extra Blake Wesley, because that is easily replaced.

On deals like Cam Payne or Reggie Bullock, I agree, getting as much value out of the deal itself is important, because there is no other intrinsic value - you HAVE to get the value up front. But with Lauri (or insert player of your choice), the price isn't as important because the real long-term value comes elsewhere. To use the house example, it's like haggling over $5,000 on a house that's $100,000 under market. I'm not going to let that last $5,000 kill the deal where because I'm only getting $95k of instant equity instead of $100k.

A more adept example would be from what I do in real life, which involves buying and selling businesses. If a deal creates long term strategic value FAR in excess of the price, then haggling over long-term rounding errors isn't the name of the game.

But, if you don't think Lauri is worth it - that is fine. I disagree. I think a 7-footer with his offensive skillset is rare. I don't need him to be a defensive stud, only passable (which I think he is) and I think his defensive metrics would vastly improve in a lineup with CP3-Devin-Castle-Wemby. I don't need a team with five all-defense guys, and I think the lineup I'm proposing would be a pretty damn formidable defensive unit because of the way they fit together.

Im more than fine “losing” a deal for the right guy at the right time. You nailed it; I simply dont think Lauri is that guy. So it’s not a price thing nor is it a bias or mentality thing; it’s a player thing.

[DPG21920]

This is the DPG best offer I was thinking of. I actually wouldn't do the ATL25.

But really the main difference between him and I is that SA28 pick (which I think should be valued in the mid20s).

I also have Collins being the ballast in mine, and if they want Keldon instead of Collins then SA26 becomes a swap instead of a pick.

In reality though, I'd probably still do those 4 picks I mentioned plus Keldon, because I personally don't rate Keldon that highly. I do recognize that he fills an important role, it's just a role I think we could easily replace.

Ya - to me this is losing the deal but still getting your guy. Im not just tossing in Keldon + another first like it’s nothing. Then it gets into getting bent over territory and risky territory due to my opinion of Lauri.

[benefactor]

ST....the place that is obsessed with lockdown defenders:lol

Explain to me how that worked in the playoffs. And explain to me how that worked for teams that couldn't shoot when it mattered

[DPG21920]

I never said you were biased (that might have been somewhere else). I said you seem to value winning deals on an individual basis above the bigger picture. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just an observation I made going back to last offseason. With every trade, it seems like you were really focused on extracting maximum value out of each deal.

What I'm suggesting is that for a move like Lauri (or whomever the top target is going to be), I'm okay losing a little value on the deal, because the true value doesn't come from saving an extra mid-20s FRP, it comes from making Wemby + Lauri + Devin + Castle + SA25 + ATL25 my long term core. I don't care if I lose out on an extra Blake Wesley, because that is easily replaced.

On deals like Cam Payne or Reggie Bullock, I agree, getting as much value out of the deal itself is important, because there is no other intrinsic value - you HAVE to get the value up front. But with Lauri (or insert player of your choice), the price isn't as important because the real long-term value comes elsewhere. To use the house example, it's like haggling over $5,000 on a house that's $100,000 under market. I'm not going to let that last $5,000 kill the deal where because I'm only getting $95k of instant equity instead of $100k.

A more adept example would be from what I do in real life, which involves buying and selling businesses. If a deal creates long term strategic value FAR in excess of the price, then haggling over long-term rounding errors isn't the name of the game.

But, if you don't think Lauri is worth it - that is fine. I disagree. I think a 7-footer with his offensive skillset is rare. I don't need him to be a defensive stud, only passable (which I think he is) and I think his defensive metrics would vastly improve in a lineup with CP3-Devin-Castle-Wemby. I don't need a team with five all-defense guys, and I think the lineup I'm proposing would be a pretty damn formidable defensive unit because of the way they fit together.

You basically calling me Danny Ainge :lol

[benefactor]

DPG weren't you on team Reed Sheppard? I need you to reconcile that with the fact that you don't give up assets for Lauri

[scott]

You basically calling me Danny Ainge :lol

I mean... yeah! That's why I was saying that it's not an insult! Ainge is a master at winning deals! But, that hasn't exactly gotten him anywhere in Utah (yet).

[benefactor]

You apparently agree this team needs shooting. Everything else he brings is just a plus. A big plus. Why you so afraid to give up assets for him? Why do you trust this front office to do something with those assets?

[DPG21920]

DPG weren't you on team Reed Sheppard? I need you to reconcile that with the fact that you don't give up assets for Lauri

Damn sure was :lol

Reed was “no” risk (in context) since he was a rookie deal and a draft pick where we didnt give up a bunch of other picks to get him and player(s) on top of having to immediately pay him 40M+

I like Lauri as a fit - I do not like paying super all star prices for a guy who will have his role reduced on SA due to his skillset alongside punting the opportunity costs of getting to draft and/or trade for guys who may have better skillsets and upside alongside Wemby etc..

[DPG21920]

This is largely shaped by not only judging the prices some are willing to pay (4-5+ picks alongside conversations of Keldon and Sochan etc..) when I started looking at his numbers compared to other “stars” with regards to offensive hubs (which is why SA would get him and pay those prices).

Once I started doing the comps more on him and seeing the differences (ignoring defensive issues) purely on offensive side of the ball (how many of his baskets were self created vs assisted, his assist rate and creation off dribble, his ability to get to line and create own offense, where his shots came from and how) it’s just started to paint a picture of a guy who is really good but not worth the type of deals discussed here (I could be wrong! It’s just my opinion)

And yes, my “bias” may be that I have more trust in the FO with regard to future trades/drafts than many here have. I fully admit that may look foolish down the road and I wil be the first to call it out.

It’s not like I say nothing bad about the spur FO. I ripped the Primo pick. I ripped the Collins and especially Doug deal. I hated DeRozan for Kawhi deal. I questioned why they would punt 8th pick this draft without a bigger plan to do more than just add CP3.

Despite all of that I personally think they have done more good than bad

[scott]

I'm intrigued that you value self-creation with whomever we add to be our #2, DPG21920, because I actually view self-creation in this team structure as not really what we want. In the short term, I expect CP3, Devin and Wemby having the ball most of the time, with Castle eventually taking more and more of that himself overtime (and eventually naturally phasing out CP3 out completely as he moves on next year). Lauri's off the ball movement is ideal for me, because that's what fits those other guys. I don't really want a bunch of guys who are self-creators, because of our weaknesses of late seems to be a dire lack of off-the-ball movement, opening up the offense and providing spacing.

In my opinion, the ideal build will be:

Short run: CP3, Devin and Wemby doing the bulk of the playmaking. Castle with a little, but primarily an off-the-ball cutter to start; Lauri as your off-the-ball perimeter and cutter (both of which are his specialty).

Long run: Castle replaces CP3 in that playmaking role, hopefully developing a shot, and if you can get a 3-and-D wing next to Lauri who maybe isn't as potent offensively but has more on the defensive end (but still a capable 3pt shooter). I still think Lauri can easily put up 20+ ppg in that role, because the gravity of Wemby will free up so much. If teams want to try to take Lauri away, then it's just going to free up Devin (or that next 3-and-D SF when Castle moves to PG) on the perimeter.

IMO, not only will Lauri benefit from the unique fit in San Antonio, but Devin might see a big level up in efficiency with Lauri out there taking attention away from the D. Right now, teams can slack off of Sochan completely, and Tre almost completely. Champ is out there to try and provide a perimeter threat, but as much as I like Champ... he's only Champ. Wemby and Devin had to carry too much off the offense. That's actually why I think those end of season lineups without Devin and Sochan started to look good... there was a more distributed threat and teams couldn't just focus on limiting Wemby and Devin as much as possible.

So, I personally don't value much off-the-dribble self creation in this next piece, unless we're viewing that as an upgrade to Devin and we're going to look for a 3-and-D elsewhere (or turn Devin into an off-the-ball player, which I'm not sure best utilizes his talents).

[DPG21920]

I'm intrigued that you value self-creation with whomever we add to be our #2, DPG21920, because I actually view self-creation in this team structure as not really what we want. In the short term, I expect CP3, Devin and Wemby having the ball most of the time, with Castle eventually taking more and more of that himself overtime (and eventually naturally phasing out CP3 out completely as he moves on next year). Lauri's off the ball movement is ideal for me, because that's what fits those other guys. I don't really want a bunch of guys who are self-creators, because of our weaknesses of late seems to be a dire lack of off-the-ball movement, opening up the offense and providing spacing.

In my opinion, the ideal build will be:

Short run: CP3, Devin and Wemby doing the bulk of the playmaking. Castle with a little, but primarily an off-the-ball cutter to start; Lauri as your off-the-ball perimeter and cutter (both of which are his specialty).

Long run: Castle replaces CP3 in that playmaking role, hopefully developing a shot, and if you can get a 3-and-D wing next to Lauri who maybe isn't as potent offensively but has more on the defensive end (but still a capable 3pt shooter). I still think Lauri can easily put up 20+ ppg in that role, because the gravity of Wemby will free up so much. If teams want to try to take Lauri away, then it's just going to free up Devin (or that next 3-and-D SF when Castle moves to PG) on the perimeter.

IMO, not only will Lauri benefit from the unique fit in San Antonio, but Devin might see a big level up in efficiency with Lauri out there taking attention away from the D. Right now, teams can slack off of Sochan completely, and Tre almost completely. Champ is out there to try and provide a perimeter threat, but as much as I like Champ... he's only Champ. Wemby and Devin had to carry too much off the offense. That's actually why I think those end of season lineups without Devin and Sochan started to look good... there was a more distributed threat and teams couldn't just focus on limiting Wemby and Devin as much as possible.

So, I personally don't value much off-the-dribble self creation in this next piece, unless we're viewing that as an upgrade to Devin and we're going to look for a 3-and-D elsewhere (or turn Devin into an off-the-ball player, which I'm not sure best utilizes his talents).

Im going to bed but wanted you to know I saw this and will do my best to answer tomorrow where Im coming from on this.

[spurraider21]

Do the spurs need a self creating starting PF next to wemby, Vassell, castle (or insert eventual point guard of the future)

at some point it becomes worth adding a 7 foot MPJ type. I just wish Lauri had more consistent defense.

[rankingtear]

Do the spurs need a self creating starting PF next to wemby, Vassell, castle (or insert eventual point guard of the future)

at some point it becomes worth adding a 7 foot MPJ type. I just wish Lauri had more consistent defense.

The problem with a self creating 4 is the two-man game with the 5 generates no mismatch as opossed to a guard. Ideally you want a role player on that spot. The talent should be on the guard spot. Lauri on the other hand opens up the 3 man game of offensive juggernauts like DEN and GSW.

[objective]

MPJ is a good example of why selling the farm for Markannen would be a terrible idea.

MPJ is on an awful cap killing contract. If he wasn't on a contender then sure, maybe he'd put up bigger stats like Markannen. And as it is, he puts up fine numbers, 16-18 points a game on 40% from 3 or so these past 2 years with 6-7 rebounds.

But he's expendable and they could have spent their money better. Ultimately it's just overspending for three point shooting and spacing.

Money should be for Wemby and whoever is the on ball creator. Make everyone fit around that that. And no matter what moves they make this summer, there has to be enough money to pay for that non-wemby creator or enough assets to get him, via draft or trade, and Markannen ain't that guy.

Another example would be Towns. While he's become a great shooter at his size, he can't be counted on to generate for himself and is the most restrictive contract they have. Hell the Wolves media guys I listen to were thrilled with Dillingham because they needed someone else to create and Towns couldn't. So a 160 pound rookie will have to carry the weight of all their dreams.

People might argue, pay Markkannen now and figure the other stuff later. Everyone's paying big, look at Boston! But No way the Holts and their minority partners are ever going to pay the kind of money that Boston has committed to, so much their owner is bowing out. They'll be 2nd apron with just the starters in a couple of years.

If a tall shooter is what the Spurs need, they could probably get Towns off the Minnesota books for a lot less next summer, same with Porter. Don't need to burn so much on Ainge's guy.

[Wilt Chamberlain]

Or players they could flip. Keldon showed he wouldn't stop a tank, but I would assume he wouldn't be in the deal if the Jazz were apathetic or against it. Johnson has more value to the Spurs as a player than a trade piece. However, the hypothetical scenario I was responding to had Keldon and Sochan as the outgoing players in the Markkanen deal. That's why I included him. The Spurs have the ability to basically take Mark into cap space, so they don't actually need to trade any particular ballast like so many ideas in this thread include.

Johnson's making over MLE on the bench. He has use to you if you don't think Castle or Sochan can't play the 3. KJ's on ball defense is atrocious.

It's hardly an albatross but the contract stinks. Unless Ainge needs to meet a floor, I just don't see Ainge not seeing that as value to the Spurs.

Sochan is on a rookie deal and can defend.

[RC_Drunkford]

spurstalk: "I don't want this guy, he needs the ball in his hands. We need Wemby to get as many touches as possible."

also spurstalk: "I don't want this guy, he has no self creation ability and needs to be assisted"

[Wilt Chamberlain]

Damn sure was :lol

Reed was “no” risk (in context) since he was a rookie deal and a draft pick where we didnt give up a bunch of other picks to get him and player(s) on top of having to immediately pay him 40M+

I like Lauri as a fit - I do not like paying super all star prices for a guy who will have his role reduced on SA due to his skillset alongside punting the opportunity costs of getting to draft and/or trade for guys who may have better skillsets and upside alongside Wemby etc..

He is an all star. There are more teams than all stars but not many. If you figure each team can fit at least 2 max level players at least you would be paying max money to two all stars once Wemby comes up.

KJ and Collins are eating up $35M AAV. Getting them off the books would allow yet another significant player or two even after LM is brought in.

[RC_Drunkford]

MPJ is a good example of why selling the farm for Markannen would be a terrible idea.

MPJ is on an awful cap killing contract. If he wasn't on a contender then sure, maybe he'd put up bigger stats like Markannen. And as it is, he puts up fine numbers, 16-18 points a game on 40% from 3 or so these past 2 years with 6-7 rebounds.

But he's expendable and they could have spent their money better. Ultimately it's just overspending for three point shooting and spacing.

Money should be for Wemby and whoever is the on ball creator. Make everyone fit around that that. And no matter what moves they make this summer, there has to be enough money to pay for that non-wemby creator or enough assets to get him, via draft or trade, and Markannen ain't that guy.

Another example would be Towns. While he's become a great shooter at his size, he can't be counted on to generate for himself and is the most restrictive contract they have. Hell the Wolves media guys I listen to were thrilled with Dillingham because they needed someone else to create and Towns couldn't. So a 160 pound rookie will have to carry the weight of all their dreams.

People might argue, pay Markkannen now and figure the other stuff later. Everyone's paying big, look at Boston! But No way the Holts and their minority partners are ever going to pay the kind of money that Boston has committed to, so much their owner is bowing out. They'll be 2nd apron with just the starters in a couple of years.

If a tall shooter is what the Spurs need, they could probably get Towns off the Minnesota books for a lot less next summer, same with Porter. Don't need to burn so much on Ainge's guy.

You do realize Jokic and Murray are on a max also, while we got Wemby on a rookie deal and Vassell making half of that?

[lefty]

Lauri is not going anywhere

Ainge has drafted well so they will hsve the right pieces to go along with Markannen

[objective]

You do realize Jokic and Murray are on a max also, while we got Wemby on a rookie deal and Vassell making half of that?

Of course, and MPJ is killing their team, couldn't even keep kcp.

Spurs need a Murray, hopefully someone better, they'll be needing the max if they're not on a rookie deal

If there's a trade for Markannen and the plan is to use bird rights, that's 4 more years after 1 where the money will be big. That bleeds over into the Wemby extension, and in time they'll combine for what, $100 million a year?

Good long term financial planning has to be done now. Spurs traded away Scola to get off of 2.5 million of Butler money, Denver lost KCP and burned all their future draft assets getting off money (3 2nds to get off $5 million of Reggie Jackson? Ouch!) or desperately trying to find cheap players. Spurs will be in the same boat if they're not careful

[RC_Drunkford]

Of course, and MPJ is killing their team, couldn't even keep kcp.

Spurs need a Murray, hopefully someone better, they'll be needing the max if they're not on a rookie deal

If there's a trade for Markannen and the plan is to use bird rights, that's 4 more years after 1 where the money will be big. That bleeds over into the Wemby extension, and in time they'll combine for what, $100 million a year?

Good long term financial planning has to be done now. Spurs traded away Scola to get off of 2.5 million of Butler money, Denver lost KCP and burned all their future draft assets getting off money (3 2nds to get off $5 million of Reggie Jackson? Ouch!) or desperately trying to find cheap players. Spurs will be in the same boat if they're not careful

Wemby's extension will kick in in 2027. If there's a Markkanen trade now you renegotiate his contract and then frontload it. Even if you don't and give him the full max, you have 3 seasons of Markkanen with enough cap space to sign another FA. Then you'd have 2 years left where Wemby gets paid too, but Vassell will still earn 50% of what is a max right now. By 2027 the cap will be about 180 million. See how that works? This is exactly the way to maximize cap space without risking getting to apron territory which is what a lot of y'all fail to understand.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Reasonable price? Get him. Overpay just to improve some? No. Im out.

Ultimately, this is the only real argument for most people here (bar a couple of lunatics). Everything else - whether he'd stay, whether he's a legit 2nd option, etc. - is irrelevant.

We can safely assume Lauri's price would fall somewhere between Siakam's and Bridges's. The arguments are many because of the fact the Spurs own so many, and diverse, picks to offer.

I, for one, would be happy to pay somewhere in the middle of that spectrum and would get queasy if it goes towards the higher end, but I believe Lauri would be great on the current Spurs and the type of player who'd be an easy fit for any team, so he would be tradable even if he disappoints. It wouldn't be a disastrous trade that would set the franchise back and it would also leave enough assets for another big trade. Downsides are fewer, imo.

[tbdog]

Lauri is not going anywhere

Ainge has drafted well so they will hsve the right pieces to go along with Markannen

Lauri fits essentially every team in the NBA. He will improve every team. He is kinda like Bridges or Paul George. You don't have to change your play book. He just slids right in.

[objective]

Wemby's extension will kick in in 2027. If there's a Markkanen trade now you renegotiate his contract and then frontload it. Even if you don't and give him the full max, you have 3 seasons of Markkanen with enough cap space to sign another FA. Then you'd have 2 years left where Wemby gets paid too, but Vassell will still earn 50% of what is a max right now. By 2027 the cap will be about 180 million. See how that works? This is exactly the way to maximize cap space without risking getting to apron territory which is what a lot of y'all fail to understand.

Ahh, but if the price to acquire is too high, it short circuits adding a better player.

Markkannen on the team next year probably guarantees the playoffs from here out, no lotto picks there.

If the cost to acquire him is the better picks of other teams, no lotto picks there.

Max deal for Markannen, which is a fair expectation, no cap space for a max deal free agent. Not enough attractive assets to trade for a superstar

It's a tightrope to walk. Not just in acquiring new talent but in keeping it. Denver lost their starting SG on a very matchable deal, but they were just too cheap. But compared to the Spurs, they might as well be Balmer. They paid more tax in 23-24 than the Spurs have spent in franchise history combined by about $ 3 million.

If the asset cost is low, fine. If the monetary cost is low relative to the max, fine. Even better if Markkannen waits the year and signs outright

[RC_Drunkford]

Ahh, but if the price to acquire is too high, it short circuits adding a better player.

Markkannen on the team next year probably guarantees the playoffs from here out, no lotto picks there.

If the cost to acquire him is the better picks of other teams, no lotto picks there.

Max deal for Markannen, which is a fair expectation, no cap space for a max deal free agent. Not enough attractive assets to trade for a superstar

It's a tightrope to walk. Not just in acquiring new talent but in keeping it. Denver lost their starting SG on a very matchable deal, but they were just too cheap. But compared to the Spurs, they might as well be Balmer. They paid more tax in 23-24 than the Spurs have spent in franchise history combined by about $ 3 million.

If the asset cost is low, fine. If the monetary cost is low relative to the max, fine. Even better if Markkannen waits the year and signs outright

I didn't know people on this message board were that slow. Have you actually ever looked at our cap sheet and the 2025 free agent class? Please tell me where in 2025 is a max free agent available? I'd like to know that one. The only good player available will be Naz Reid. Spurs cap next season is 77 million and that's with Zach Collins and Keldon Johnson who are worth another 35 million. The cap will be 150 million. Are you that bad at math?

And again, why do you want lottery picks? Do you want to draft your entire 15 man roster? We have 8 draft picks on the team right now, 4 of them top 10 and likely 1 or 2 more in the next draft. Y'all really want to contend in 2030 it seems.

[rankingtear]

Ahh, but if the price to acquire is too high, it short circuits adding a better player.

Markkannen on the team next year probably guarantees the playoffs from here out, no lotto picks there.

If the cost to acquire him is the better picks of other teams, no lotto picks there.

Max deal for Markannen, which is a fair expectation, no cap space for a max deal free agent. Not enough attractive assets to trade for a superstar

It's a tightrope to walk. Not just in acquiring new talent but in keeping it. Denver lost their starting SG on a very matchable deal, but they were just too cheap. But compared to the Spurs, they might as well be Balmer. They paid more tax in 23-24 than the Spurs have spent in franchise history combined by about $ 3 million.

If the asset cost is low, fine. If the monetary cost is low relative to the max, fine. Even better if Markkannen waits the year and signs outright

You can renegotiate and cut 22 million. Then a flat deal like Devin then you got a fun max contract after the first year of the extension. As long as they are still no news about any other signing they are holding that capspace for Lauri.

[objective]

I didn't know people on this message board were that slow. Have you actually ever looked at our cap sheet and the 2025 free agent class? Please tell me where in 2025 is a max free agent available? I'd like to know that one. The only good player available will be Naz Reid. Spurs cap next season is 77 million and that's with Zach Collins and Keldon Johnson who are worth another 35 million. The cap will be 150 million. Are you that bad at math?

And again, why do you want lottery picks? Do you want to draft your entire 15 man roster? We have 8 draft picks on the team right now, 4 of them top 10 and likely 1 or 2 more in the next draft. Y'all really want to contend in 2030 it seems.

The math is why I've posted like I have. The math has to work not just for one year or 2.years before Wemby gets a supermax, it has to work his entire career wthin the constraints of ownership. Markkannen is like a Dejounte, a modest all star. He's probably not enough to win the title solely by his addition, so the cost must be measured carefully.

My quick math was if they trade Keldon for Markkannen to get his cap hold and pay dearly in assets, they wouldn't have the space to absorb a max player at the max or sign anyone to the max. Do the math for every season and it becomes a tightrope through Wemby's supermax.

Naz Reid is a good idea for a player who can have a similar impact on winning with a cheaper cost, as he showed this year to the point where Finch was telling Towns to play like Reid after his injury.

[LeBowen]

Markkannen is like a Dejounte, a modest all star.

I disagree, but even if we take that he was, you have to realize Dejounte's contract is a big underpay considering the extensions handed out these days.
Rookie extensions are in the range of 200/5, the cap is about to blow up.

https://i.imgur.com/r5eXYlp.png

https://i.imgur.com/qhrQspU.png

For 25-26 season we can easily go down to $65M total salaries if we get rid of Zach, Keldon, Malaki, Wesley, Sidy and Bassey. I think it's fair to say none of them have a long-term future here.
That's $90M under the cap.

Even if we go with the route of keeping both '25 picks, those two rookies probably won't cost more than $15M combined, since they won't be in top5.
That's even if we draft both, which isn't that realistic, if trade options and this draft are any indication of PATFO's future plans.
Anyhow, that's still $75M under the cap.

Wemby, Devin, Jeremy, Castle, Champagnie and two rookies on the roster.
If we get a max player, doesn't have to be Markkanen, that would be around $30M left on the cap.
Then you either offer Tre a new deal or get another veteran similar to CP3 to rotate with Castle at point. Maybe even keep CP3 for one more year, who knows.
Let's say $15M left for the sake of Tre's raise. Maybe a 30/2 contract.

Castle/Tre
Devin/rookie
rookie/Champagnie
Markkanen/Jeremy
Wemby/?

We'd have about $15M to get a veteran backup for Wemby.
Or maybe we kept Zach (please no). Or we kept Keldon and drafted a rookie big. However you want it.
Maybe Ingram or another cheap player pops up to fill the rotation.

And the cap keeps growing every year.


Naz Reid is a good idea for a player who can have a similar impact on winning with a cheaper cost, as he showed this year to the point where Finch was telling Towns to play like Reid after his injury.

I also love Naz, but if we're to nitpick, I'd argue that he's a worse defender than Lauri.
He's not an all-star, but he'll surely ask for around $30M a year.

[Mikesatx]

FWIW I started playing fantasy basketball two seasons ago. I traded for Laurie in the first season and drafted him in the second. At different points I also had Kessler & Clarkson. Because of this I watched more Jazz basketball than I ever would have otherwise. Here are my observations.

Laurie is an absolute beast on the court. He is not a one trick pony and his defense his much better than what many in the thread are giving him credit for.

The Jazz were way overachieving two seasons ago primarily because Laurie came in and developed into a lot more than he was prior to getting there. Kessler was also a surprised. Utah traded Conley, Beasley and Alexander that February. Last year they traded Olynyk and Agbaji.

the talk about his durability had more to do with shutting him down versus being chronically injured.

i also had Bridges on my fantasy team last year so watched a fair amount of Nets games. Bridges is not at the same level as Laurie, not even close. Someone suggested Cam Johnson. In the games I watched he never did anything memorable and was probably the 4th option on a crap team.

He is worth pushing the chips in on. I can’t think of any other players that are gettable that I would say the same about.

[SpursBills]

I have my misgivings about the contract that Markannen's going to be given and his durability, but I'm confused why people think that he's going to come in and his usage his going to drop way down.

He had a TS% of 63% last two years in Utah being an offensive focal point, and it's not like he was pounding the ball into the ground for his possessions

For reference:
Devin Vassell - 57%
Wembanyama - 57%
Devin Booker - 61%
Steph Curry 67% peak, 61% last year

If a guy shows that he can be an efficient offensive player on high usage, why would you decrease his usage? If he comes over, I'm shunting usage (not time of possession) to him to try and drive a more efficient offense and waiting to see if Wemby and Vassell can catch up / develop. If he's a first option driving efficient offense rather than the 3rd option that some are anticipating, that's way more worthy of giving up draft capital.

[exstatic]

MPJ is a good example of why selling the farm for Markannen would be a terrible idea.

MPJ is on an awful cap killing contract. If he wasn't on a contender then sure, maybe he'd put up bigger stats like Markannen. And as it is, he puts up fine numbers, 16-18 points a game on 40% from 3 or so these past 2 years with 6-7 rebounds.

But he's expendable and they could have spent their money better. Ultimately it's just overspending for three point shooting and spacing.

Money should be for Wemby and whoever is the on ball creator. Make everyone fit around that that. And no matter what moves they make this summer, there has to be enough money to pay for that non-wemby creator or enough assets to get him, via draft or trade, and Markannen ain't that guy.

Another example would be Towns. While he's become a great shooter at his size, he can't be counted on to generate for himself and is the most restrictive contract they have. Hell the Wolves media guys I listen to were thrilled with Dillingham because they needed someone else to create and Towns couldn't. So a 160 pound rookie will have to carry the weight of all their dreams.

People might argue, pay Markkannen now and figure the other stuff later. Everyone's paying big, look at Boston! But No way the Holts and their minority partners are ever going to pay the kind of money that Boston has committed to, so much their owner is bowing out. They'll be 2nd apron with just the starters in a couple of years.

If a tall shooter is what the Spurs need, they could probably get Towns off the Minnesota books for a lot less next summer, same with Porter. Don't need to burn so much on Ainge's guy.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen MPJ put the ball on the floor, or score at the rim. Just because they’re both tall (Lauri is taller) and can shoot doesn’t make them the same.

[R. DeMurre]

One more comp featuring Lauri's game: when he became the first player in history to finish a season with 200 3s and 100 dunks, he ended with 111 dunks. That's the same number of dunks that LeBron had the year Cleveland won the title, but LeBron played 400 more minutes. Klay Thompson, over 11 seasons, has a total of 132 dunks. The notion that Markkanen is nothing but a three point guy is simply not true. The highest number of dunks Dirk ever had in a single season was 48. In the '03 season when Duncan was league MVP and finals MVP, he finished the year with exactly 111 dunks. By any standard, Lauri is elite at getting to the rim.

[Sugus]

It comes down to this...do you actually trust this team that purports to be a team that gets better through the draft to actually get better through the draft? How much real trust do you have in them? I personally don't really trust them. Make the trade.

I ask you the same thing, then: what is the problem with Castle as a draft pick? Was he not the best player and best fit for the team when taken? Because the Dillingham pick/trade has nothing to do with the team's ability to get better through the draft.

But I do agree with your overall point that everyone's sitting pretty solidly on their side of the fence.

[LeBowen]

I ask you the same thing, then: what is the problem with Castle as a draft pick? Was he not the best player and best fit for the team when taken?

Castle was probably a tier1 player on everyone's board.
Since we weren't after big men, other tier1 players already got picked and for us it was either Castle or another random swing.
I already said Castle was my preferred player at #4 and I'm happy we got him, but I'm not sure PATFO would've picked him over Risacher or Sheppard if they were on the board.


Because the Dillingham pick/trade has nothing to do with the team's ability to get better through the draft.

It actually does.
How many times have we seen a team in desperate need of talent trade a top10 pick away? Without getting an actual player in return, but future picks?
At least a couple of players that were available at #8 will become legit starters for playoff teams. Maybe they won't be all-stars, but there are some good future NBA players in there.
But PATFO wasn't sure who's it going to be and traded the pick away instead of making a risk.

Fine, I also get that side of the argument. But why would I be optimistic they'll be competent enough to hit with a few more late lottery picks down the road? Or picks outside the lottery?
Jeremy, Primo, Devin with three mid to late lottery picks isn't a good record, if you ask me.


But I do agree with your overall point that everyone's sitting pretty solidly on their side of the fence.

And I like it. That's what forums are for...as long as people have valid arguments.

For example, my take is that most anti-Markkenen people in here don't follow the league closely enough to realize how hard it is to get an all-star wing these days and that two good FRPs and two average ones isn't that high of a price if your entire roster is young and you actually believe in them.
Also, I don't think realize how few actual lottery picks we have in our stash.

If Trae stays, odds of getting a top10 pick from Atlanta are very low. If he leaves, it probably doesn't happen for two more seasons meaning only '27 pick could be good.
But even then, they overestimate the quality of that pick because a team with no pick has no incentive to tank. That's +10 wins right away. Every year there are at least 5 times tanking on purpose and then like 5 more than decide to pull the handbrake and they tank in the final few months.

The only way to get a top5 pick from another team is dumb luck, like what happened with Rockets this year.
To overvalue a pick because you believe in dumb luck is just bad strategy from my perspective. We got all the lottery luck we needed.

To put things into perspective, Nets had the 9th best odds in lottery. 20% odds to land a top4 pick. Can't be in 5-8th range. Just 1-4th and 9-1th.
Any team that wants to win easily gets 30 wins.
Do you value 20% chance to land a top4 pick and like 20% chance of that pick being better than Markkanen more than getting the actual all-star about to enter his prime?
That's 4% jackpot for you. With two or three tickets, one each year.

Also, Markkanen needing an extension right away isn't that bad. If we give him a raise and extension right away, it would be a good value deal considering the cap projections.
What we don't want is to have all-stars who'll be up for extension in the same year (+/-1) as Wemby. That's how you get into luxury right away.

[RC_Drunkford]

The math is why I've posted like I have. The math has to work not just for one year or 2.years before Wemby gets a supermax, it has to work his entire career wthin the constraints of ownership. Markkannen is like a Dejounte, a modest all star. He's probably not enough to win the title solely by his addition, so the cost must be measured carefully.

My quick math was if they trade Keldon for Markkannen to get his cap hold and pay dearly in assets, they wouldn't have the space to absorb a max player at the max or sign anyone to the max. Do the math for every season and it becomes a tightrope through Wemby's supermax.

Naz Reid is a good idea for a player who can have a similar impact on winning with a cheaper cost, as he showed this year to the point where Finch was telling Towns to play like Reid after his injury.

you just prove that you haven‘t read anything or looked up the cap. A Markkanen deal would be for 5 years, after that you obviously pivot and let him go or resign him cheaper since he’d be 32 by then. We‘re not giving out 15 year deals for players next to Wemby and I clearly showed you that you can still add other pieces. We have plenty of contracts on our roster that expire when Wemby is due for his contract.

[Mugen]

Do the spurs need a self creating starting PF next to wemby, Vassell, castle (or insert eventual point guard of the future)

at some point it becomes worth adding a 7 foot MPJ type. I just wish Lauri had more consistent defense.

Unfortunately Saluan was picked at #6 tbh

[Mr. Body]

Markkannen is like a Dejounte, a modest all star.

What I've been saying. Dejounte scored nearly a triple doub per the season he got All-Star, then when he had to share the floor with better players on a playoff-aspiring team, his production went down, until he was traded this year for a couple pieces and couple picks.

That's Lauri Markkanen. Both players were reserves on the All-Star team for good years that hid the fact that they were only very good player. Nice to have players. Not break the bank players.

He's a player you get for what he's worth - a player or two plus a couple of picks. But when you add in the rest - the fact that he sits out so many games a year, is a play finisher rather than passer or creator, or even much of a connector - the appeal starts draining piece by piece. Finally, as you say, when you're looking at a max for this player, that's just not a good idea.

Again, the reason why we're seeing a very slow market for him. Even if Ainge brings the costs to acquire down from absurdity. He's nice but super problematic at that price.

[Mr. Body]

Do the spurs need a self creating starting PF next to wemby, Vassell, castle (or insert eventual point guard of the future)

at some point it becomes worth adding a 7 foot MPJ type. I just wish Lauri had more consistent defense.

And as I've been saying, he barely plays like a 7 footer. His rebounding is pretty good, but doesn't block shots, no defensive presence.

[Splits]

Fortunately bust Saluan was picked at #6 tbh

fixed

[CitizenDwayne]

What I've been saying. Dejounte scored nearly a triple doub per the season he got All-Star, then when he had to share the floor with better players on a playoff-aspiring team, his production went down, until he was traded this year for a couple pieces and couple picks.

That's Lauri Markkanen. Both players were reserves on the All-Star team for good years that hid the fact that they were only very good player. Nice to have players. Not break the bank players.

He's a player you get for what he's worth - a player or two plus a couple of picks. But when you add in the rest - the fact that he sits out so many games a year, is a play finisher rather than passer or creator, or even much of a connector - the appeal starts draining piece by piece. Finally, as you say, when you're looking at a max for this player, that's just not a good idea.

Again, the reason why we're seeing a very slow market for him. Even if Ainge brings the costs to acquire down from absurdity. He's nice but super problematic at that price.

But the alternative isn’t another, more consistent all star level guy

The alternative is starting Julian Champagnie

Looking at it with that in mind renders a lot of your nitpicks moot

[Ariel]

If Trae stays, odds of getting a top10 pick from Atlanta are very low. If he leaves, it probably doesn't happen for two more seasons meaning only '27 pick could be good.
But even then, they overestimate the quality of that pick because a team with no pick has no incentive to tank. That's +10 wins right away. Every year there are at least 5 times tanking on purpose and then like 5 more than decide to pull the handbrake and they tank in the final few months.

The only way to get a top5 pick from another team is dumb luck, like what happened with Rockets this year.
To overvalue a pick because you believe in dumb luck is just bad strategy from my perspective. We got all the lottery luck we needed.

To put things into perspective, Nets had the 9th best odds in lottery. 20% odds to land a top4 pick. Can't be in 5-8th range. Just 1-4th and 9-1th.
Any team that wants to win easily gets 30 wins.
Do you value 20% chance to land a top4 pick and like 20% chance of that pick being better than Markkanen more than getting the actual all-star about to enter his prime?
That's 4% jackpot for you. With two or three tickets, one each year.
Lets assume Spurs and Atlanta go into the season without any significant moves. Where would you reasonably have them finish the season, worst to best? As in, pre-lottery standings with 1 being worst in the league. Just trying to put actual numbers on this.

[DPG21920]

He is an all star. There are more teams than all stars but not many. If you figure each team can fit at least 2 max level players at least you would be paying max money to two all stars once Wemby comes up.

KJ and Collins are eating up $35M AAV. Getting them off the books would allow yet another significant player or two even after LM is brought in.

Im fine using KJ + Collins money. I even proposed a deal for them for Lavine + lowering protections on CHI pick

[poopbox]

Lauri fits essentially every team in the NBA. He will improve every team. He is kinda like Bridges or Paul George. You don't have to change your play book. He just slids right in.

He didn't improve the Bulls or the Cavs

He has Utah not good enough to make the play in but not bad enough to get a top 5 pick

[cutewizard]

Let's be honest, this team doesn't have the courage to trade for Lauri, or for any player in his talent and salary range.

Kawhi, Lamarcus, and to an extent Derozan, castrated the Spurs and they don't have the balls to do big boy trades for big boy players.

Kawhi just told them fuck you I don't want to be here trade me

Lamarcus said nah I'm not coming off the bench and went home, never came back

Derozan said pay the max or I'll play somewhere else.

Real nba players who are good are also demanding, something they will find out the hard way dealing with Victor. He won't be a wide eyed 20 year old forever. A few more years of him watching his contemporaries teams get better while his team just keeps "keeping the powder dry" and he'll be itching to get out to. He'll stay long enough to get super maxed...which is on pace to be around 450 million dollars, and then bounce.

The kings had Haliburton, knew he would be good, but traded him to the Pacers anyway, to get a player in Sabonis to pair with their franchise player Fox. That takes balls. Cause Haliburton came into the league on fire. From the first time he stepped on the court for the Kings he oozed gawd tier offensive talent. But the Kings picked a player, Fox, and they picked a direction, and said this is what we doing and that's just that.

If that is the type of team who is pursuing Lauri, you think this pussy ass front office can even compete with them :lmao

A team who signs the Mcbuckets and Collins of the world are now going to jump up out of nowhere and sign an all star caliber player shooting 50 40 90 in his prime :lmao

This front office is just collecting picks because they are to pussy to do anything else :lmao

These clowns had to pay Chris Paul 11 million dollars to be a babysitter :lmao
----+-++++

Hahaha

[cutewizard]

Any updates guys?

I'm thinking Markkanen 24/7 now huhuhuhuu

[montgod]

But the alternative isn’t another, more consistent all star level guy

The alternative is starting Julian Champagnie

Looking at it with that in mind renders a lot of your nitpicks moot

I feel like this thought process is based on the Spurs competing in the West and being successful in the playoffs with Lauri. IMO I just don't see that happening with the West being so deep. So to give up picks/cap space towards getting Lauri and him taking minutes from Sidy, Julian, and at times Castle/Vassell/Sochan, wouldn't be the best answer in the short or long term just for the sake of saying Spurs possibly made it to the play-in. Doesn't mean moves can't be made still before trade deadline if Castle shows he's even better than advertised or others have improved together as a unit drastically but not right now.

And in the meantime, the '25 draft is loaded with players who I think could come in and make a big difference right away in addition to Castle and others gaining experience this year and having a great feel next year. If Lauri is available as a FA then, and still fits, then sure, Spurs will have more room and knowledge on what they have and who fits and who doesn't. I just don't see Lauri as a can't miss product that needs to be acquired to compromise the FO's plan forward - and this is most likely why nothing has transpired with Lauri with Spurs as well as the rest of the league.

[Splits]

Lets assume Spurs and Atlanta go into the season without any significant moves. Where would you reasonably have them finish the season, worst to best? As in, pre-lottery standings with 1 being worst in the league. Just trying to put actual numbers on this.

Not an exact answer to your question, but these are the current betting odds (columns: 1-championship ; 2 conference; 3 division)

https://i.ibb.co/m9P5xrt/image.png

https://i.ibb.co/ZVSGV2w/image.png

[LeBowen]

Lets assume Spurs and Atlanta go into the season without any significant moves. Where would you reasonably have them finish the season, worst to best? As in, pre-lottery standings with 1 being worst in the league. Just trying to put actual numbers on this.

Nets, Wizards, Blazers look like three worst rosters right now.
Pistons, Hornets, Bulls are trying to put something together, but should also be horrible.
Raptors have some pieces, but will surely want to get another top5 pick.
Jazz depends on Lauri trade, but even with him they'll tank.

Imo, those are top8 worst teams that will be tanking intentionally. Barring an injury crisis, noone else is getting in there.

Spurs, Hawks, Rockets are in that tier of young teams trying to actually win games.
Then we have Clippers and Warriors as zombie rosters trying to stay relevant, but it would be better if they just blow it up.

Heat, Pelicans, Kings, Suns, Lakers as the play-in candidates.

That's 18 teams that could end up in the lottery, other 12 should definitely be in the playoffs unless a major injury crisis happens, similar to Grizzlies this season.

I'd say that both Spurs and Hawks can finish in 9-15th best odds range. 9-12th seems realistic.

[RC_Drunkford]

1809217798167474234

[LeBowen]

1809217798167474234

We're entering nonsense reports territory because nothing is happening.

What's Riley going to offer? A staredown?

Two swaps, Jovic, Jacquez and Herro? Lmao.

[RC_Drunkford]

We're entering nonsense reports territory because nothing is happening.

What's Riley going to offer? A staredown?

Two swaps, Jovic, Jacquez and Herro? Lmao.

yeah all they can offer is a 5.2 million deal. I have no clue what they are trying to do, but I'm pretty sure the Spurs at least gonna jump in to help facilitate certain deals and get some more assets out of it.

[Splits]

yeah all they can offer is a 5.2 million deal. I have no clue what they are trying to do, but I'm pretty sure the Spurs at least gonna jump in to help facilitate certain deals and get some more assets out of it.

another 2031 swap would be AMAZING

[DPG21920]

Ultimately, this is the only real argument for most people here (bar a couple of lunatics). Everything else - whether he'd stay, whether he's a legit 2nd option, etc. - is irrelevant.

We can safely assume Lauri's price would fall somewhere between Siakam's and Bridges's. The arguments are many because of the fact the Spurs own so many, and diverse, picks to offer.

I, for one, would be happy to pay somewhere in the middle of that spectrum and would get queasy if it goes towards the higher end, but I believe Lauri would be great on the current Spurs and the type of player who'd be an easy fit for any team, so he would be tradable even if he disappoints. It wouldn't be a disastrous trade that would set the franchise back and it would also leave enough assets for another big trade. Downsides are fewer, imo.

Mostly agree although I, due to my opinion of Lauri and role on this spurs team if he were obtained, do think theres more risk than most admit especially if Spurs pay on the higher end of the spectrum (and that’s not factoring in the opportunity cost lost).

I think he fits well and Im open to the idea but I do believe caution is warranted for the reasons I explained (role on the team, just overall risk alongside Spurs still having a lot of holes they need to fill to make the team very competitive even if they got Lauri but lost 4+ picks and Keldon/Sochan)

[Chinook]

another 2031 swap would be AMAZING

But can they pull off that heist without trading Castle?

[Splits]

But can they pull off that heist without trading Castle?

Completely off topic, but if anyone enjoyed Money Heist (La Casa de Papel) I just found the prequel of that series is "Berlin" on Netflix and it is fucking awesome/hilarious. And if you never saw the original you should be ashamed, watch in Spanish with subtitles.

[spurraider21]

And as I've been saying, he barely plays like a 7 footer. His rebounding is pretty good, but doesn't block shots, no defensive presence.
this is why i said MPJ and not Evan Mobley

he uses his length as a weapon offensively

[south side spur]

Just to add to what Splits posted
Vegas Odds

2024-2025 Eastern Conference Winner
Boston +140
New York +400
Philadelphia +400
Milwaukee +600
Miami +2000
Cleveland +2000
Indiana +2500
Orlando +2500
Atlanta +25000
Chicago +25000
Charlotte +3000


2024-2025 Western Conference Winner
Denver +375
Oklahoma City +375
Minnesota +450
Dallas +500
Los Angeles Lakers +1400
Phoenix +1600
Golden State +1800
Memphis +1800
New Orleans +2000
Los Angeles Clippers +2500
Sacramento +3300
Houston +6000
San Antonio +6000

2024-25 Southwest Division Winner
Dallas +120
Memphis +260
New Orleans +300
Houston +1000
San Antonio +3000

[Ariel]

Nets, Wizards, Blazers look like three worst rosters right now.
Pistons, Hornets, Bulls are trying to put something together, but should also be horrible.
Raptors have some pieces, but will surely want to get another top5 pick.
Jazz depends on Lauri trade, but even with him they'll tank.

Imo, those are top8 worst teams that will be tanking intentionally. Barring an injury crisis, noone else is getting in there.

Spurs, Hawks, Rockets are in that tier of young teams trying to actually win games.
Then we have Clippers and Warriors as zombie rosters trying to stay relevant, but it would be better if they just blow it up.

Heat, Pelicans, Kings, Suns, Lakers as the play-in candidates.

That's 18 teams that could end up in the lottery, other 12 should definitely be in the playoffs unless a major injury crisis happens, similar to Grizzlies this season.

I'd say that both Spurs and Hawks can finish in 9-15th best odds range. 9-12th seems realistic.
I don't disagree, except that I'm not yet sure where Toronto stands. Anyway, these are the odds of landing AT LEAST one top 4 pick (maybe 2) for every possible combination between Spurs' own pick and Atlanta's (in yellow the range you specified):

https://i.postimg.cc/WzJbRt3Z/top4.png

If they finish 9 & 10 (or viceversa), there's a 32.14% chance of landing a top 4 pick. If one of them sneaks into the bottom 8, then chances increase substantially. My point is, there's an interesting chance Spurs could land a very good pick next year, in a loaded draft. And even if not, still should be very valuable picks, whether to keep or trade. Consider the return for #8 in a weak draft, 2 picks in that range in a much better one can be even more valuable. I'd keep those picks.

[tbdog]

He didn't improve the Bulls or the Cavs

He has Utah not good enough to make the play in but not bad enough to get a top 5 pick

Different player back then. Utah were meant to have bottom out and Lauri made them too good. Hardy also gets credit.

[CGD]

We're entering nonsense reports territory because nothing is happening.

What's Riley going to offer? A staredown?

Two swaps, Jovic, Jacquez and Herro? Lmao.

Didn’t you hear? All 36 NBA teams, including the 8 future expansion teams, are showing interest in Lauri.

Angie trolling everyone this off season.

[LeBowen]

If they finish 9 & 10 (or viceversa), there's a 32.14% chance of landing a top 4 pick. If one of them sneaks into the bottom 8, then chances increase substantially. My point is, there's an interesting chance Spurs could land a very good pick next year, in a loaded draft. And even if not, still should be very valuable picks, whether to keep or trade. Consider the return for #8 in a weak draft, 2 picks in that range in a much better one can be even more valuable. I'd keep those picks.

I guess the difference between your and mine opinion is that I don't really think 32.14% are good odds.
Especially since it's not once 32.14% chance, but 13.9% and 20.2%.

I'd even be fine if we could move up a bit, but it's either top4, stay at your position or move down.
No 5-8th pick if you have 9th odds.

Of course, we could try and trade up, but I don't think it's going to happen in a strong draft.

Also, my general idea for Markkanen trade excludes trading '25 picks, Jazz has enough '25 picks.
I just don't want Spurs to tank to gett a better pick of our own. Just play the season out.

[exstatic]

We're entering nonsense reports territory because nothing is happening.

What's Riley going to offer? A staredown?

Two swaps, Jovic, Jacquez and Herro? Lmao.

We’re entering Danny Ainge ain’t getting shit for offers territory.

[exstatic]

I guess the difference between your and mine opinion is that I don't really think 32.14% are good odds.
Especially since it's not once 32.14% chance, but 13.9% and 20.2%.

I'd even be fine if we could move up a bit, but it's either top4, stay at your position or move down.
No 5-8th pick if you have 9th odds.

Of course, we could try and trade up, but I don't think it's going to happen in a strong draft.

Also, my general idea for Markkanen trade excludes trading '25 picks, Jazz has enough '25 picks.
I just don't want Spurs to tank to gett a better pick of our own. Just play the season out.

Immaterial from adding them together. We own all of the number combinations.

[LeBowen]

Immaterial from adding them together. We own all of the number combinations.

But don't those combinations change as the draft goes on or it's just simulated all at once?
As in every single outcome has a number and then they just pull one out?

Regardless, I'll always be a believer that teams with franchise player in place shouldn't base their strategy on unfavorable odds.
As I said in a previous post, even if we get those 32% odds and jump into top4, what are odds of drafting a player better than Markkanen?
Around 25%?
Even if it's a 50-50 if we can draft a player better than Markkanen after jumping with 32% odds, what are the odds of that player being than Markkanen in first three seasons after the draft?
Or are we going to wait to be legit contenders until Wemby turns 25?

Again, I wouldn't trade '25 picks, but you can apply this same logic to '27.
We going to hold onto that pick just to have a lottery ticked with Wemby already being the best player in the league instead of getting him some help?

[lefty]

Lauri fits essentially every team in the NBA. He will improve every team. He is kinda like Bridges or Paul George. You don't have to change your play book. He just slids right in.

He definitely does

Just saying Ainge won’t let him go unless he gets a grewt return

[cd98]

The problem for the Jazz is that all the GMs making offers are smart and aren’t going to overpay. GSW, Spurs, and the Heat are too well run to give the haul Ainge will want. Kings have a better GM and don’t do the stupid stuff they did in the past. Ainge prays on dumb teams and desperate teams and none of those teams are the kind he exploits.

I predict Jazz resign him and wait for a desperate team to show next season.

[exstatic]

He definitely does

Just saying Ainge won’t let him go unless he gets a grewt return

He
Is
On
The
Clock.

[R. DeMurre]

Danny Ainge has a reputation that's deserved, but I think the early takes on the Gobert trade jumped the gun and are changing now, and there's reason to believe that Tim Connelly did pretty well going head-to-head with him. Gobert and Mike Conley are both important in Minnesota's being relevant, and the picks/swaps of '25, '26, & '27 are probably going to be relatively inconsequential: a couple of picks in the mid 20s, and a swap that won't convey. That leaves just the '29 pick as potentially being something substantial. Connelly bet on his team being good for the foreseeable future, and so far, that bet is paying off.

[spurraider21]

He
Is
On
The
Clock.
why is he on the clock. why not just extend lauri. or sign him back for the max when he hits FA? and then wait to trade him next year?

[Ignazzz]

2025 plan?

[Leetonidas]

Does anyone realize the Jazz GM is actually Justin Zanik? :lol im sure as POBO that Ainge has a lot of power I just think it's funny I don't think I've seen anyone reference Zanik at all in this thread

[Mr. Body]

Danny Ainge has a reputation that's deserved, but I think the early takes on the Gobert trade jumped the gun and are changing now, and there's reason to believe that Tim Connelly did pretty well going head-to-head with him. Gobert and Mike Conley are both important in Minnesota's being relevant, and the picks/swaps of '25, '26, & '27 are probably going to be relatively inconsequential: a couple of picks in the mid 20s, and a swap that won't convey. That leaves just the '29 pick as potentially being something substantial. Connelly bet on his team being good for the foreseeable future, and so far, that bet is paying off.

Cleveland resigning Mitchell makes a big difference, too. It still seems a safe bet that some of those MN picks might be sweet given Gobert's age and roster trouble, but Wolves have a pretty strong GM and they can figure a way out. If Edwards continues his trajectory, even if they decay as a contender they may never be that bad.

Ainge really needs to bottom out and stop pretending with the Markkanen situation. He can't go into the season with him on the roster, so just swallow his dumb pride and move off him. His insistence on winning every trade by a mile is eating up his runway right now.

[Chinook]

Does anyone realize the Jazz GM is actually Justin Zanik? :lol im sure as POBO that Ainge has a lot of power I just think it's funny I don't think I've seen anyone reference Zanik at all in this thread

Because GMs aren't always (or maybe even usually) the key decision-makers of their teams. I've been saying this about Wright, and folks ignore it and keep singling him out for criticism.

[spurraider21]

1809310611005997392
Chinook for the august date

[R. DeMurre]

Does anyone realize the Jazz GM is actually Justin Zanik? :lol im sure as POBO that Ainge has a lot of power I just think it's funny I don't think I've seen anyone reference Zanik at all in this thread

True, but look at what Chris Paul said after he was signed: that a talk with Pop convinced him... it wasn't a conversation with Brian Wright.

[RC_Drunkford]

I doubt the Spurs would like that tbh. It makes more sense for them to renegotiate that contract and pay Markkanen significant extra money this year to get some type of discount at the end of his deal where Wemby would be on the max.

[LeBowen]

Tbh, biggest takeaway is that Spurs can offer the best package and should just tell Ainge call us after you've exhausted all other options so we can see what's the best offer you got.
Then they either beat it or say Markkanen isn't worth that much.

[ace3g]

https://x.com/andyblarsen/status/1809304142248309241

[Mr. Body]

1809310611005997392
Chinook for the august date

If he's extended, it gets much harder to handle his salary. And then in six months no one's going to even remember Markkanen's on the market since a billion other things will have happened.

Ainge really needs to get this done. He won't want to enter the season with Markkanen needing to keep up his stats while the team wants to super-tank. And the risk is high they won't be able to move him at all for a while and might be stuck with a player they don't want at this time.

[scott]

I said this earlier, but I think Ainge/Zanik (to give proper credit - AAFTO?) have probably committed to moving Lauri (not Ainge, that was a typo - sorry) this offseason, and that the "we don't want to trade him" is just them being good at their jobs, just like all these leaks of "20 teams have called" is. AAFTO is trying to squeeze every last drop out of this deal, and they should (in their position).

I also believe there are likely multiple teams registering serious interest, and probably a small handful of teams (and maybe those teams are in fact, GSW, SAS and SAC... but maybe it's some others) who have made "significant offers". These leaks are just AAFTO trying to squeeze out a few more assets. AAFTO is doing their duty to their team. Whether or not it works, is another question. He only needs one team to blink, and he has time.

Where he loses leverage is when Aug 6 comes (if that is in fact the date) and the days start to pass by with no extension. At that point, it becomes obvious that there will be no extension, and one threat to the acquisition will be taken off the table. Right now, the idea of extending Lauri gives AAFTO leverage - and that's why you hear the story "we don't want to trade Lauri". If teams were allowed to collude, it would be everyone's best interest to wait until after 8/6 to make real offers... but since they can't, it only requires one team to defect. This is Game Theory 101. The Nash Equilibrium here is that Lauri gets traded before 8/6 for a price higher than what will be required after 8/6.

For PAFTO, I don't see them as a team that will blink.

Edit: corrected typo

[Chinook]

1809310611005997392
Chinook (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=37557) for the august date

The question is, did Stein confirm that date with the league office, or did he confirm the trade deadline and people are just assuming he confirmed the anniversary? There's a legit chance that the buzz Stein's post is going to cost will persuade someone who can provide actual clarity to do so. If I were one of those folks who tweeted at people, I would want to ask Stein or Marks or even Smith if that anniversary was actually confirmed. Right now, there are a lot of people reporting this based on what Stein posted, so it's clear it hasn't been public knowledge. It also wouldn't make sense why there'd be so much trade chatter involving Mark right now if the Jazz were going to sign him on 08/06. Besides the whole tanking thing, it's in their best interest to wait, and if Stein is to be believed, it'd be in the other teams' best interest too. So is Mark not game, and that's why this is coming up? Are the Jazz so scared of winning too many games that they're trying to force something while Marks near the pit of his value? Does Ainge think the extra cap space can be used more efficiently?

Ugh.

[Mr. Body]

I said this earlier, but I think Ainge/Zanik (to give proper credit - AAFTO?) have probably committed to moving Ainge this offseason,

Well, there's a twist.

[Ignazzz]

Bad news for spurs.

[scott]

https://x.com/andyblarsen/status/1809304142248309241

From a non-Spurs perspective, this would make for a very interesting trade deadline!

[MultiTroll]

1.5 Career Assist ave
2.0 highest assist year ever, last year.

I get it, he's a shooter. However do NOT need another phuck who cannot / will not get Wemby the ball.

[LeBowen]

1.5 Career Assist ave
2.0 highest assist year ever, last year.

I get it, he's a shooter. However do NOT need another phuck who cannot / will not get Wemby the ball.

He'd give Wemby the space, something noone on this roster does.

CP3/Castle/Devin have the ball, teams have to choose between single-coverage in the paint or Wemby or leaving a 40% 3pt shooter wide open.
And as someone wrote earlier, Markkanen had 117 dunks this season, he's a great finisher.

[Mr. Body]

1.5 Career Assist ave
2.0 highest assist year ever, last year.

I get it, he's a shooter. However do NOT need another phuck who cannot / will not get Wemby the ball.

He's the sort of player who would kill any hopes of the beautiful game. He's like a far better Risacher to me. Doesn't use his height, not a great self-creator, can't pass very well. Risacher could play some defense, Markkanen can rebound. Otherwise they're terminal points in an offense. You can't expect them to create for others.

[MultiTroll]

He'd give Wemby the space, something noone on this roster does.

CP3/Castle/Devin have the ball, teams have to choose between single-coverage in the paint or Wemby or leaving a 40% 3pt shooter wide open.
And as someone wrote earlier, Markkanen had 117 dunks this season, he's a great finisher.
Good points.
I'm thinking long term. Want someone that is an all around player. Don't we all.
Very hard to find in todays NBA being the Kobme Generazion . Or they cost $$$$$$.

[Kevin]

1.5 Career Assist ave
2.0 highest assist year ever, last year.

I get it, he's a shooter. However do NOT need another phuck who cannot / will not get Wemby the ball.

Klay Thompson for his career averages 2.3 assist's and he's wing and not considered a ball hog or bad passer.

You cannot assume a guy's a ball hog/bad passer because of low assist numbers. Kobe averaged 4.5 assists and he's the biggest ball hog in NBA history.

[MultiTroll]

Is there another Ginobili?

Will there ever be?

[Manu&Duncan fan]

He
Is
On
The
Clock.

This!

Spur's offer is already too good to refuse. Lauri is dying to come here. Jazz is eager to tank.

[Ariel]

Tbh, biggest takeaway is that Spurs can offer the best package and should just tell Ainge call us after you've exhausted all other options so we can see what's the best offer you got.
Then they either beat it or say Markkanen isn't worth that much.
Agreed. Spurs shouldn't help Ainge put Markkanen out of their reach by entering a bidding war and inflating his value, if he's serious about trading Lauri then sit and negotiate directly with the Spurs' FO, if you want to play games then FO.

[RC_Drunkford]

I said this earlier, but I think Ainge/Zanik (to give proper credit - AAFTO?) have probably committed to moving Lauri (not Ainge, that was a typo - sorry) this offseason, and that the "we don't want to trade him" is just them being good at their jobs, just like all these leaks of "20 teams have called" is. AAFTO is trying to squeeze every last drop out of this deal, and they should (in their position).

I also believe there are likely multiple teams registering serious interest, and probably a small handful of teams (and maybe those teams are in fact, GSW, SAS and SAC... but maybe it's some others) who have made "significant offers". These leaks are just AAFTO trying to squeeze out a few more assets. AAFTO is doing their duty to their team. Whether or not it works, is another question. He only needs one team to blink, and he has time.

Where he loses leverage is when Aug 6 comes (if that is in fact the date) and the days start to pass by with no extension. At that point, it becomes obvious that there will be no extension, and one threat to the acquisition will be taken off the table. Right now, the idea of extending Lauri gives AAFTO leverage - and that's why you hear the story "we don't want to trade Lauri". If teams were allowed to collude, it would be everyone's best interest to wait until after 8/6 to make real offers... but since they can't, it only requires one team to defect. This is Game Theory 101. The Nash Equilibrium here is that Lauri gets traded before 8/6 for a price higher than what will be required after 8/6.

For PAFTO, I don't see them as a team that will blink.

Edit: corrected typo

but they can't extend him for the max can they? Somebody here said it's only for a certain percentage of the 18 million he's earning now. Markkanen would never sign that type of deal.

[Chinook]

but they can't extend him for the max can they? Somebody here said it's only for a certain percentage of the 18 million he's earning now. Markkanen would never sign that type of deal.

APPARENTLY, they can renegotiate to give Mark a pay raise, then use the increased salary as the basis for the extension. My brains are basically leaking out of my ears at this point. But if that's true, teams are looking at this as either Lauri on a long-term deal but with a higher (and harder-to-match) salary for this year or Lauri at a rather-easy-to-match salary but without the assurance of him already being signed to a long-term deal.

[exstatic]

The problem for the Jazz is that all the GMs making offers are smart and aren’t going to overpay. GSW, Spurs, and the Heat are too well run to give the haul Ainge will want. Kings have a better GM and don’t do the stupid stuff they did in the past. Ainge prays on dumb teams and desperate teams and none of those teams are the kind he exploits.

I predict Jazz resign him and wait for a desperate team to show next season.

I don’t think he re-signs there. He hasn’t been thrilled with two years of tanking. Why would he sign up for more? Signing there puts him on Danny’s timeline, not his own.

[AFBlue]

Are the Spurs now the only game in town after the moves by the Kings (assume DeRozan ends up there) and Warriors?

[scott]

but they can't extend him for the max can they? Somebody here said it's only for a certain percentage of the 18 million he's earning now. Markkanen would never sign that type of deal.

In addition to the renegotiate and extend scenario that Chinook laid out and the ramifications, I'm not entirely sure that teams would prefer for Utah to be (effectively) negotiating their guy's extension. Then you're stuck with whatever Utah comes up with, no creativity in how you structure yours (if it's going to be anything less than max money for max years... if that is the case, then maybe it doesn't matter other than the extra difficulty of finding matching salary). Teams may rather prefer to have that wink-wink assurance of an extension (Siakam/OG type deal) so they can control it.

Also... Ainge/Zanik may want to trade him off before renegotiate-and-extend, because they don't want to have to take the matching salary back. If they're going to tank (which they should), they probably want to operate right at the salary floor, with the option to absorb bad contracts for compensation later.

I think Ainge get's his best return trading Lauri before 8/6, with Lauri's buy-in that he'll extend with that team. Then teams will give their best offers with the confidence that they can resign him.

[scott]

Are the Spurs now the only game in town after the moves by the Kings (assume DeRozan ends up there) and Warriors?

Nothing Warriors have done takes them out of the Lauri hunt (if they want). They can still find matching salary for Lauri quite easily.

[SpursFan86]

1809324955387011192

Getting tired of this saga at this point but fwiw :lol Based on this it appears GS isn’t wanting to include Kuminga, but Utah isn’t budging for only two FRPs.

[Mr. Body]

Ainge really think his shit is chocolate sundae.

[Chinook]

1809324955387011192

Getting tired of this saga at this point but fwiw :lol Based on this it appears GS isn’t wanting to include Kuminga, but Utah isn’t budging for only two FRPs.

On the other hand, apparently Kuminga and two firsts is good enough.

[vy65]

1809324955387011192

Getting tired of this saga at this point but fwiw :lol Based on this it appears GS isn’t wanting to include Kuminga, but Utah isn’t budging for only two FRPs.

"We have a heavily pick-based offer for you Danny but one problem; our offer isn't pick-heavy."

[scott]

Ainge milking this, as this is the most the Jazz will be talked about all year. He'll be able to go in front of ownership with a report of the value of the earned media and media mentions he generated throughout the year. Maybe he'll get a raise and he too can elevate to the echelons of highest paid FO member without delivering any actual basketball results.

[RC_Drunkford]

In addition to the renegotiate and extend scenario that Chinook laid out and the ramifications, I'm not entirely sure that teams would prefer for Utah to be (effectively) negotiating their guy's extension. Then you're stuck with whatever Utah comes up with, no creativity in how you structure yours (if it's going to be anything less than max money for max years... if that is the case, then maybe it doesn't matter other than the extra difficulty of finding matching salary). Teams may rather prefer to have that wink-wink assurance of an extension (Siakam/OG type deal) so they can control it.

Also... Ainge/Zanik may want to trade him off before renegotiate-and-extend, because they don't want to have to take the matching salary back. If they're going to tank (which they should), they probably want to operate right at the salary floor, with the option to absorb bad contracts for compensation later.

I think Ainge get's his best return trading Lauri before 8/6, with Lauri's buy-in that he'll extend with that team. Then teams will give their best offers with the confidence that they can resign him.

that's what I'm saying. The Spurs would most likely want to frontload his salary as much as possible and renegotiate to pay him a portion of it in this season. Makes much more sense.


1809324955387011192

Getting tired of this saga at this point but fwiw :lol Based on this it appears GS isn’t wanting to include Kuminga, but Utah isn’t budging for only two FRPs.

:lol @ 3 first round picks. If that's the best offer (I don't see how NOLA, Miami or SAC can offer much more) we can easily beat that by just throwing in Keldon Johnson and the CHA first.

[scott]

that's what I'm saying. The Spurs would most likely want to frontload his salary as much as possible and renegotiate to pay him a portion of it in this season. Makes much more sense.



:lol @ 3 first round picks. If that's the best offer (I don't see how NOLA, Miami or SAC can offer much more) we can easily beat that by just throwing in Keldon Johnson and the CHA first.

If it ends up only going for 2 unprotected plus one protected, we can easily beat that, and if Ainge took that, it would frankly be a little upsetting if we didn't beat it.

SA30 + MIN31 + SA27 all unprotected beat that.

You could also do SA30 + MIN31 + SA27 (Top 8 protected) + CHI25 to beat that.

Maybe even SA30 + MIN31 + Worst of SA/ATL27 + CHI.

Again, I'm assuming that SA30 and MIN31 are givens because of the unique control it will give Utah over MIN.

[CGD]

1809324955387011192

Getting tired of this saga at this point but fwiw :lol Based on this it appears GS isn’t wanting to include Kuminga, but Utah isn’t budging for only two FRPs.

End this madness Warriors, please!

[vy65]

1809347377230467350

[RC_Drunkford]

SA 27, MIN 31, CHI 25, CHA 25. That's 2 unprotected and 2 protected ones, although the CHA is likely 2 second rounders, but who cares. That + Keldon is the absolute max I would offer them.

[vy65]

1809304142248309241

Article is behind a paywall, but it sounds like Stein checked with the league office and confirmed 8/6 is the beginning date of when Lauri can sign his extension.

Chinook

[CGD]

It would be highly dumb to deal with Utah until that 08/06 date, unless you are truly desperate (Warriors with Steph) or the price comes way down (tbd).

Call Ainge’s bluff.

[Kevin]

Utah almost has to trade Lauri this summer if that deadline info is true. Hopefully they settle on something shortly after the holiday. 2030 swaps, 2031 Minny pick, Bulls pick and CHA pick plus Sochan?

[Wilt Chamberlain]

He definitely does

Just saying Ainge won’t let him go unless he gets a grewt return

Ainge says that but he just added 2 more PF on top of Collins and Hendricks.

[baseline bum]

1809324955387011192

Getting tired of this saga at this point but fwiw :lol Based on this it appears GS isn’t wanting to include Kuminga, but Utah isn’t budging for only two FRPs.

Damn if GSW can only offer two unprotected FRP the Spurs might be able to swing this deal with only one of the ATL picks, the 2030 SAS + MIN/DAL swaps, the 2031 MIN, and a lesser pick like the 2025 CHI plus salary filler.

[Pauleta14]

It would be highly dumb to deal with Utah until that 08/06 date, unless you are truly desperate (Warriors with Steph) or the price comes way down (tbd).

Call Ainge’s bluff.

What about the Graham's dealine? (the 8/7)?

It could be the Spurs's too

[scott]

What about the Graham's dealine? (the 8/7)?

It could be the Spurs's too

We're using American methodology on these dates. Graham's date is 7/8 (July 8), Lauri's is 8/6 (Aug 6)

[baseline bum]

It would be highly dumb to deal with Utah until that 08/06 date, unless you are truly desperate (Warriors with Steph) or the price comes way down (tbd).

Call Ainge’s bluff.

You lose the ability to include Graham as cheap salary cap fodder after July 7th.

[Chinook]

1809304142248309241

Article is behind a paywall, but it sounds like Stein checked with the league office and confirmed 8/6 is the beginning date of when Lauri can sign his extension.

Chinook

I appreciate you posting this. I had actually seen that earlier, and I'm not sure that's what he's saying. We don't know if the league office confirmed the 08/06 date or if Stein is assuming that while the office confirmed the six-month ban and when the trade deadline is. I assume, though, that if it were patently false, someone would've tweeted out a correction, since Mark is dominating the news cycle. So I'm just shrugging my shoulders at this point. It would be nice for someone to just ask for an explanation, though.

I really feel like a lot of people just assume Mark extended on 08/06 like basically everyone else did. Normally, that shit gets hammered out during the moratorium, on the first day of the off-season, everything gets signed immediately. They might just not know Mark didn't sign until three-weeks later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_2021%E2%80%9322_NBA_season_transactions#Fr ee_agents

[vy65]

It would be highly dumb to deal with Utah until that 08/06 date, unless you are truly desperate (Warriors with Steph) or the price comes way down (tbd).

Call Ainge’s bluff.

Why do you say that?

[Pauleta14]

We're using American methodology on these dates. Graham's date is 7/8 (July 8), Lauri's is 8/6 (Aug 6)

My bad on the form

What about the question? ^^

Could the eighth of July be a deadline from the Spurs? Maybe they think it's only worth it if Graham's contract is included (and don't want to trade any other for now)?

[Chinook]

My bad on the form

What about the question? ^^

Could the eighth of July be a deadline from the Spurs? Maybe they think it's only worth it if Graham's contract is included (and don't want to trade any other for now)?

Since Graham is due only $2.8 Million, it would be pretty shocking for that to break up a trade. They could probably fit Markkanen into cap space if they wanted so finding matching salary shouldn't stop them. That doesn't mean they don't have other plans for the contract that they'll enact if there's no movement though.

[Pauleta14]

Since Graham is due only $2.8 Million, it would be pretty shocking for that to break up a trade. They could probably fit Markkanen into cap space if they wanted so finding matching salary shouldn't stop them. That doesn't mean they don't have other plans for the contract that they'll enact if there's no movement though.

Can't the Spurs guaranty him to use the 12.5M instead for the trade?

[scott]

Can't the Spurs guaranty him to use the 12.5M instead for the trade?

Yes of course they can. But then some other team has to pay Graham $12.5MM.

[CGD]

You lose the ability to include Graham as cheap salary cap fodder after July 7th.

I kinda think Ainge wants some real players back. Otherwise the GSW deal would’ve gotten done by now, no?

[scott]

Certainly there is a deal where Ainge would take Graham over Keldon or Sochan (or any other player), it just impacts the compensation. You can send Graham and Collins - but it will cost you more picks.

[baseline bum]

I kinda think Ainge wants some real players back. Otherwise the GSW deal would’ve gotten done by now, no?

We're screwed if that's the case then :lol

[CGD]

Certainly there is a deal where Ainge would take Graham over Keldon or Sochan (or any other player), it just impacts the compensation. You can send Graham and Collins - but it will cost you more picks.

I suspect the GWS offer is Wiggins + 3FRP + 2SWAPS. No real players coming back.

[Chinook]

Can't the Spurs guaranty him to use the 12.5M instead for the trade?

They could, and it would probably be preferable for them to do so. The Spurs have yet to drop below the cap this year, and with the ability to use the MLE to sign Paul, they might elect to stay over. That would let them use Osman's Bird right and Barlow's EB rights and have access to the LLE. But there is a pathway to pure space by dumping Graham's deal into someone else's cap space, renouncing Mamu and waving Bassey or Champangie (or waiving both and keeping Mamu). That would give them the pure space they need to take him. When talking about a guy of Mark's caliber, either avenue should be open. That's even more true because the Spurs could just re-sign any of the players they waive or just find replacements in the worst case using the room exception.

So yeah, they might WANT to use Graham over going through the mess for space or using any of the other players. But it would be weird for them to back out of the trade altogether because of it, because the cost difference is some fringe players and a couple of second-round picks. I'd question their priorities.

[CGD]

We're screwed if that's the case then :lol

thinking Keldon/Sochan over Graham

[Chinook]

I suspect the GWS offer is Wiggins + 3FRP + 2SWAPS. No real players coming back.

I wouldn't underrate that package given that it would be GS26, GS28 and reverse-protected GS30. Not only are three unprotected picks valuable, but those picks are in even years where Utah doesn't have an excess of selections already.

[pad300]

The real question is where does Markannen want to go. If he says he's not signing an extension with team X, they're out...

[CGD]

I wouldn't underrate that package given that it would be GS26, GS28 and reverse-protected GS30. Not only are three unprotected picks valuable, but those picks are in even years where Utah doesn't have an excess of selections already.

I agree that it is valuable. It could just be a negotiation tactic by Utah to get more offers, but if that’s the offer from a (supposedly desperate) GSW team then i wonder why Utah has jumped on it yet.

[scott]

I agree that it is valuable. It could just be a negotiation tactic by Utah to get more offers, but if that’s the offer from a (supposedly desperate) GSW team then i wonder why Utah has jumped on it yet.

I think Ainge probably views the scenario as he has until 8/6 to milk as much as possible from these suitors. He might overplay his hand and have folks move on because they don't want to fuck around with his nonsense any more.

[Pauleta14]

They could, and it would probably be preferable for them to do so. The Spurs have yet to drop below the cap this year, and with the ability to use the MLE to sign Paul, they might elect to stay over. That would let them use Osman's Bird right and Barlow's EB rights and have access to the LLE. But there is a pathway to pure space by dumping Graham's deal into someone else's cap space, renouncing Mamu and waving Bassey or Champangie (or waiving both and keeping Mamu). That would give them the pure space they need to take him. When talking about a guy of Mark's caliber, either avenue should be open. That's even more true because the Spurs could just re-sign any of the players they waive or just find replacements in the worst case using the room exception.

So yeah, they might WANT to use Graham over going through the mess for space or using any of the other players. But it would be weird for them to back out of the trade altogether because of it, because the cost difference is some fringe players and a couple of second-round picks. I'd question their priorities.

I get it. Thx for the explanations

[scott]

Lauri will be a Warrior. It's just a matter of how much Ainge milks them for.

From a league entertainment standpoint, I hope it's for a lot.

From a Spurs perspective, I hope it's not overly egregious. I can foresee scenarios where the Jazz join OKC as our lead competitor in Wemby's prime.

[offset formation]

The question is, did Stein confirm that date with the league office, or did he confirm the trade deadline and people are just assuming he confirmed the anniversary? There's a legit chance that the buzz Stein's post is going to cost will persuade someone who can provide actual clarity to do so. If I were one of those folks who tweeted at people, I would want to ask Stein or Marks or even Smith if that anniversary was actually confirmed. Right now, there are a lot of people reporting this based on what Stein posted, so it's clear it hasn't been public knowledge. It also wouldn't make sense why there'd be so much trade chatter involving Mark right now if the Jazz were going to sign him on 08/06. Besides the whole tanking thing, it's in their best interest to wait, and if Stein is to be believed, it'd be in the other teams' best interest too. So is Mark not game, and that's why this is coming up? Are the Jazz so scared of winning too many games that they're trying to force something while Marks near the pit of his value? Does Ainge think the extra cap space can be used more efficiently?

Ugh.

It kind of sounds like when you say people, you mean front offices/GMs?

Surely they're aware of any rules/stipulations. I'm sure he meant that for the general public.

[DPG21920]

Lauri will be a Warrior. It's just a matter of how much Ainge milks them for.

From a league entertainment standpoint, I hope it's for a lot.

From a Spurs perspective, I hope it's not overly egregious. I can foresee scenarios where the Jazz join OKC as our lead competitor in Wemby's prime.

Ya I honestly hope UTA keeps him and tries to extend and build around him

[Mr. Body]

Lauri will be a Warrior. It's just a matter of how much Ainge milks them for.

From a league entertainment standpoint, I hope it's for a lot.

From a Spurs perspective, I hope it's not overly egregious. I can foresee scenarios where the Jazz join OKC as our lead competitor in Wemby's prime.

Agree that he's a Warrior. They badly need him. My guess is either --

1. Ainge is trying to shake Kuminga free
2. There are other machinations to get pieces moved around

I think Sacramento has moved on to DDR and maybe also Kuzma. As for SAS, I think they're nibbling around but aren't going in hard for anyone at this time. I'd be surprised if there are hidden suitors.

[Mr. Body]

Ya I honestly hope UTA keeps him and tries to extend and build around him

Imagine being Utah, having a white boy who likes cold weather and a boring environment, and trying to move him.

[vy65]

Imagine being Utah, having a white boy who likes cold weather and a boring environment, and trying to move him.

https://worlddatingguides.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/meet-sexy-single-girls-helsinki-online-date-night-guide-768x511.jpg

I dunno, Helsinki looks pretty alright to me. Doubt there’s a Mormon equivalent.

[Chinook]

It kind of sounds like when you say people, you mean front offices/GMs?

Surely they're aware of any rules/stipulations. I'm sure he meant that for the general public.

I'm talking about the people retweeting this as confirmation. Like what we're waiting for is to know what Mark's anniversary is. The rest of that stuff, we can just google. We don't know if Stein asked them about that or instead just asked them to confirm what the rules about renegotiations and extensions were and when the trade deadline is. As I mentioned, because most players of note signed deals on 08/06, Stein could've just assumed Markkanen did too.

[Mr. Body]

https://worlddatingguides.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/meet-sexy-single-girls-helsinki-online-date-night-guide-768x511.jpg

I dunno, Helsinki looks pretty alright to me. Doubt there’s a Mormon equivalent.

Well, I'm interested.

[rankingtear]

While I legit do appreciate the arithmetic, that's not really what I'm asking. I haven't seen a reason to believe the NBA did what you're saying.

Also, 08/28 is the 25th day (or 26th since 08/03 should count). And yes, 08/03, not 08/06. The end of the moratorium isn't the start of the year. But even if it were 08/06, it'd still be the 22nd (or 23rd) day. 08/06/2024 is the 36th (or 37th) day of the year because the league year started on 07/01. Using the send of the moratorium would put the 32nd day on 08/07 (or 08/06), that's true, but the proportional date should be the 37th or 39th days if using the actual league year or 33rd or 34th days if using the end of the moratorium. The NBA could round however it wants, of course, and maybe they used the moratorium dates for some reason. But I think the 08/06 date didn't come from an actual calculation of ratios as much as it did from a brute adjustment like what they do in October.

Capela signed 4 days later in 2021 and his extension eligibility last year is august 13. 36-37% of the offseason for 21 and 23.

[Chinook]

Capela signed 4 days later in 2021 and his extension eligibility last year is august 13. 36-37% of the offseason for 21 and 23.

Sigh. Okay. Just ... okay. I think you're right. I looked at 2023 articles covering the extension-eligibility of contracts signed in the summer of 2021, and they do line up with other players. I dug even effing more and I did find this:

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2021/01/special-trade-eligibility-dates-for-202021.html

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/lebron-james-extension-answering-six-questions-you-need-to-know-as-lakers-star-nears-eligibility-for-new-deal/

https://www.givemesport.com/88042183-lebron-james-extension-six-things-know/

Those are literally the only three articles I could find on Google that mentioned it. So it looks like what that Utahn tweeter did a horrible job explaining is that the NBA used a mapping table in 2020 (and probably 2021) to project the abbreviated and altered schedule onto a normal league year. Of course since literally no one in this whole mess can site a source, I don't know for sure that the table isn't public, but that's the sense I got. So while the numerology of simply comparing ratios give somewhat skewed results from what was actually reported, that's probably due to the table being a bit more nuanced that being purely proportionate.

So I really do appreciate you bringing this up, even if I would probably be screaming at you in person for all the bullshit I've shifted through behind this. I've learned a lot of minutia about the CBA and cap history trying to get to the bottom of this. So you were pretty much right from the start, and while I think it's unacceptable that your recollection was the most solid piece of evidence I could find for at least a day, I'm glad it was there. If Mark has signed a day earlier or day later, a lot of this mess would've been avoided.

[poopbox]

Different player back then. Utah were meant to have bottom out and Lauri made them too good. Hardy also gets credit.

Or he is the exact same player just the circumstances changed. 40 million a year might be to much to find out.

[rankingtear]

Sigh. Okay. Just ... okay. I think you're right. I looked at 2023 articles covering the extension-eligibility of contracts signed in the summer of 2021, and they do line up with other players. I dug even effing more and I did find this:

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2021/01/special-trade-eligibility-dates-for-202021.html

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/lebron-james-extension-answering-six-questions-you-need-to-know-as-lakers-star-nears-eligibility-for-new-deal/

https://www.givemesport.com/88042183-lebron-james-extension-six-things-know/

Those are literally the only three articles I could find on Google that mentioned it. So it looks like what that Utahn tweeter did a horrible job explaining is that the NBA used a mapping table in 2020 (and probably 2021) to project the abbreviated and altered schedule onto a normal league year. Of course since literally no one in this whole mess can site a source, I don't know for sure that the table isn't public, but that's the sense I got. So while the numerology of simply comparing ratios give somewhat skewed results from what was actually reported, that's probably due to the table being a bit more nuanced that being purely proportionate.

So I really do appreciate you bringing this up, even if I would probably be screaming at you in person for all the bullshit I've shifted through behind this. I've learned a lot of minutia about the CBA and cap history trying to get to the bottom of this. So you were pretty much right from the start, and while I think it's unacceptable that your recollection was the most solid piece of evidence I could find for at least a day, I'm glad it was there. If Mark has signed a day earlier or day later, a lot of this mess would've been avoided.

https://hoopshype.com/lists/extension-eligible-players-in-2023-24-anthony-davis-jamal-murray-anthony-edwards-and-more/

These include dates. Lauri extension eligibility was Aug 6 2023.

[vander]

GSW should offer Draymond in the deal IMO. He would help Utah tank and the salaries are probably close

[Raven]

i don't see the point of debating him, he wouldn't play much anyway

[wildbill2u]

Is there another Ginobili?

Will there ever be?
God gave us his only begotten basketball son who performed miracles for the multitudes and there will never be another.

[heyheymymy]

I'm high on Lauri but I'm kinda feeling out if the trade includes Sochan.

That tape of the Poland games looks legit and I'm wary to let Jeremy go.

[Ariel]

Agree that he's a Warrior. They badly need him. My guess is either --

1. Ainge is trying to shake Kuminga free
2. There are other machinations to get pieces moved around

I think Sacramento has moved on to DDR and maybe also Kuzma. As for SAS, I think they're nibbling around but aren't going in hard for anyone at this time. I'd be surprised if there are hidden suitors.
The obvious move is renegotiate that pick GSW owes to Washington. It's top 20 protected so they can't profit from a potential downfall of GSW, so it'd be in both teams' best interest to renegotiate that, giving Washington a tangible asset (multiple 2nd round picks, a pick swap, a young player, etc) rather than a crappy pick that likely won't convey and will be bad even if it does, and for GSW it would give them a lot more flexibility to put together a competitive trade package. For instance, they could offer 4 unprotected FRPs ('25, '27, '29, '31) and 3 unprotected swaps ('26, '28, '30). I'd take that if I were Utah.

[tbdog]

I'm high on Lauri but I'm kinda feeling out if the trade includes Sochan.

That tape of the Poland games looks legit and I'm wary to let Jeremy go.

Sochan will have a good career.

[OldMan88]

Well, Devonte Graham’s been traded, so the $2.8M is off the books now. https://www.poundingtherock.com/2024/7/6/24193226/the-spurs-are-trading-devonte-graham-and-a-second-round-pick-to-the-hornets

[Obstructed_View]

Thank God. That 2.8 million was worrying me.

[RC_Drunkford]

1809454687315173860

[slick'81]

We all know ainge isnt dumping lauri without a kings ransom. Bwrong ain't pulling that trigger without all the trade swaps dammit

[Pauleta14]

https://x.com/WireHoops/status/1810015804878143638

[k830713]

Spurs still have an MLE exception??
Trade Markannen - Z.Collins + P. Reed contract MLE

[Mr. Body]

Rumors are that Utah demanded Keegan Murray on top of the load Sacramento already offered. Ainge is a lunatic.

[stnick2261]

We really need Markannen to refuse to extend so no one has to deal with Ainge. Let them lose LM for nothing.

[AFBlue]

Sign and trade next summer, and they can have Zollins and a couple pick swaps.

[cd98]

Ainge just doing his job. Good teams show resilience to not get suckered.

[slick'81]

Ainge just doing his job. Good teams show resilience to not get suckered.


exactly, you want lauri? Then prepare to take a pounding

[Bruno]

What will happen with Markkanen is damn obvious: Utah will re-nogotiate and extend him on August 6th.

Something that don't lie is Utah team salary. Right now, all the other NBA teams are above the salary floor. Only Utah is below it and by a lot: $16.5M. I really wonder why they are keeping all that cap space...

[Mr. Body]

Ainge just doing his job. Good teams show resilience to not get suckered.

Eh, I think he's fucking up. If he keeps Markkanen, which is likely, then he cannot outright tank the way he wants to. He may seem to think he can trade him later, but that will be next offseason when a lot has changed.

He's overvalued an asset that was delivering a nice haul. He insists on creaming other FOs and it's not working this time.

[FireMicoHalili]

Ainge just doing his job. Good teams show resilience to not get suckered.
My understanding is only Utah can re-sign him for more? Warriors fans on Twitter are smoking a whole lot of cope after losing Klay. Not sure they have enough to pry away Lauri.

[LeBowen]

Eh, I think he's fucking up. If he keeps Markkanen, which is likely, then he cannot outright tank the way he wants to. He may seem to think he can trade him later, but that will be next offseason when a lot has changed.

He's overvalued an asset that was delivering a nice haul. He insists on creaming other FOs and it's not working this time.

What do you mean he can't tank?
Isn't Markkanen just another Andrea Barganani? You've been describing him as perfect tank commander for a week.

[Mr. Body]

What do you mean he can't tank?
Isn't Markkanen just another Andrea Barganani? You've been describing him as perfect tank commander for a week.

He's not terrible. He's hardly a star who deserves a max contract. Really, the person who's making the tank impossible is Will Hardy.

[Mr. Body]

The Andrea Bargnani comp comes from someone claiming Markkanen is like Dirk Nowitzki. I said, quite correctly, that he's far closer to Bargnani than he ever would be, in any conceivable universe, to Dirk Nowitzki.

[Pauleta14]

He's not terrible. He's hardly a star who deserves a max contract. Really, the person who's making the tank impossible is Will Hardy.

I agree to a certain extend that his stats have been a bit inflated by the system and the coach but his profile is really unique in the league and his real value comes from the matchup nightmare he can create. As much in SA than in GS tbh

With the new Tv deal and if PATFO manages to bulk his first years he's 100% worth it imo, even with a lesser production.

The more I think about it the more I don't want to miss this opportunity, he's perfect next to Vic, not a huge ego, perfect Spur

[scott]

For all the slobbering that is done over Ainge as the GM, it's not too dissimilar to Chris Quinn saying that the Spurs are in a class with the Thunder and Celtics as far as GM'ing goes.

Ainge wins a lot of deals, but he doesn't win many games (like our front office as of late). The latter is what matters in this league. What makes Presti and Stevens different is that they've built winners (though Presti still hasn't delivered a chip). Ainge does deserve some of Steven's credit, however, as it was his shrew moves with Garnett and Pierce that resulted in Tatum and Brown, but there was also some degree of luck involved there. Ainge also made a big more for Kyrie that didn't really pay off and then lost him for nothing.

[Extra Stout]

With the Spurs having used up all their cap space on the Paul and Barnes acquisitions, they no longer would have the ability to renegotiate the last year of Markkanen’s contract so that the 40% raise on his extension would reach the max.

I think the only teams left with enough space to do that are the Jazz themselves and the Pistons.

Markkanen and his agent therefore have a vested interest in trying to scuttle any trades from the Jazz by suggesting they won’t re-sign.

What makes the most sense for Markkanen is to stay with the Jazz, do the renegotiation and extension ASAP on August 6, and then if the Jazz still want to trade him, they can do so at the trade deadline.

[scott]

With the Spurs having used up all their cap space on the Paul and Barnes acquisitions, they no longer would have the ability to renegotiate the last year of Markkanen’s contract so that the 40% raise on his extension would reach the max.

I think the only teams left with enough space to do that are the Jazz themselves and the Pistons.

Markkanen and his agent therefore have a vested interest in trying to scuttle any trades from the Jazz by suggesting they won’t re-sign.

What makes the most sense for Markkanen is to stay with the Jazz, do the renegotiation and extension ASAP on August 6, and then if the Jazz still want to trade him, they can do so at the trade deadline.

I don't believe an acquiring team doing a re-negotiation was every really in the cards, since there is a 6-mo waiting period for the acquiring team to do so. If someone acquires Lauri, it will be with the unofficial promise of an extension, unless the Jazz to the renegotiation on Aug 6 and execute a trade deadline deal (which I don't think is in their best interest, personally).

Personally, I think we'll see Lauri get traded somewhere before Aug 6 - Ainge is just squeezing every last drop from suitors.

[spurs10]

With the Spurs having used up all their cap space on the Paul and Barnes acquisitions, they no longer would have the ability to renegotiate the last year of Markkanen’s contract so that the 40% raise on his extension would reach the max.

I think the only teams left with enough space to do that are the Jazz themselves and the Pistons.

Markkanen and his agent therefore have a vested interest in trying to scuttle any trades from the Jazz by suggesting they won’t re-sign.

What makes the most sense for Markkanen is to stay with the Jazz, do the renegotiation and extension ASAP on August 6, and then if the Jazz still want to trade him, they can do so at the trade deadline. They can use Barnes in a trade with Utah, making room for Lauri I believe.

[MannyIsGod]

For all the slobbering that is done over Ainge as the GM, it's not too dissimilar to Chris Quinn saying that the Spurs are in a class with the Thunder and Celtics as far as GM'ing goes.

Ainge wins a lot of deals, but he doesn't win many games (like our front office as of late). The latter is what matters in this league. What makes Presti and Stevens different is that they've built winners (though Presti still hasn't delivered a chip). Ainge does deserve some of Steven's credit, however, as it was his shrew moves with Garnett and Pierce that resulted in Tatum and Brown, but there was also some degree of luck involved there. Ainge also made a big more for Kyrie that didn't really pay off and then lost him for nothing.

Dude Ainge built the Boston team taht won in the 2000s and he built the core of the team that just won. He definitely has won and has done so in multiple eras and has done well as GM of multiple teams. Its hard to find fault with him. He's way more of the reason Boston just won than Stevens is.

[Extra Stout]

I don't believe an acquiring team doing a re-negotiation was every really in the cards, since there is a 6-mo waiting period for the acquiring team to do so. If someone acquires Lauri, it will be with the unofficial promise of an extension, unless the Jazz to the renegotiation on Aug 6 and execute a trade deadline deal (which I don't think is in their best interest, personally).

The renegotiation and extension are two separate things. The renegotiation would be on his existing deal, to get his salary high enough that the extension, limited as it is to a 40% raise, could reach the max. I don’t think the renegotiation has a 6-month moratorium for the acquiring team.

The renegotiation, though, has to come out of cap space.

[scott]

Dude Ainge built the Boston team taht won in the 2000s and he built the core of the team that just won. He definitely has won.

PAFTO built the teams that won in the 2000s too. Not really relevant at this point. The league changes. And I already gave him credit for the current Celtics squad.

The point here is that none of Ainge's shrew dealmaking has amounted to shit in Utah, nor have the moves that PAFTO has made in the last 7 years they're getting credit for.

[scott]

The renegotiation and extension are two separate things. The renegotiation would be on his existing deal, to get his salary high enough that the extension, limited as it is to a 40% raise, could reach the max. I don’t think the renegotiation has a 6-month moratorium for the acquiring team.

The renegotiation, though, has to come out of cap space.

I thought Chinook said that the renegotiation also had a 6-month moratorium, but I could be wrong.

[Dejounte]

They can use Barnes in a trade with Utah, making room for Lauri I believe.

If Barnes didn’t update all his pages to show Spurs in them, this is what I would believe. I just find it hard to believe they’d risk losing some of their guys to get Barnes. That’s… weird.

[MannyIsGod]

PAFTO built the teams that won in the 2000s too. Not really relevant at this point. The league changes. And I already gave him credit for the current Celtics squad.

The point here is that none of Ainge's shrew dealmaking has amounted to shit in Utah, nor have the moves that PAFTO has made in the last 7 years they're getting credit for.

This is like saying the cake I put in the oven 30 seconds ago doesn't taste good.

[Extra Stout]

I thought Chinook said that the renegotiation also had a 6-month moratorium, but I could be wrong.

If it did, that would be all the more reason for Markkanen to work to scuttle any trade. His best and maybe only chance to reach the max would be with Utah.

[scott]

It is nice to acquire vet players and get to talk about how they'll find into the team instead of how much dead money we're eating to waive them, at least.

[scott]

This is like saying the cake I put in the oven 30 seconds ago doesn't taste good.

Is this Ainge's first season as Utah's CEO? He might be working that same patience grift as PAFTO.

Since taking over, he's made moves to get them from playoff team to treadmill team, with their arrow pointing down. How long it takes him to bottom out will be important, and then how quickly he can build after that is the next (which is the same question the Spurs FO is facing right now).

[scott]

If it did, that would be all the more reason for Markkanen to work to scuttle any trade. His best and maybe only chance to reach the max would be with Utah.

He'll get the max next summer one way or another (barring injury). Not sure if that extra money this season takes priority for him over the right home. Varies by player I suppose.

[CGD]

Time to lock this thread?

[scott]

Time to lock this thread?

Did the Jazz trade him elsewhere?

[MannyIsGod]

All I keep hearing about this trade is how Utah doesnt' want to trade him. That strikes me as nothing but posturing to get a better offer out of team's that have reached out. I'm not pressed for the Spurs to make a huge offer at this moment. I think if they can get him for a few picks then that would be great but it doesn't seem like Utah is dying to trade this guy for some middling first rounders off in the future. Ainge obviously feels like he has leverage here and he's not just going to give in to the first OK offer he gets. The Spurs shouldn't be rushing out to get a deal done now unless the price is right and there's absolutely no indication the price is right ATTM.

I like LM but I don't understand the rush to go out give away the farm for him just yet. People clown the Hawks for their shit move so I would hope they would understand why the Spurs shouldn't rush into the same shit.

[scott]

All I keep hearing about this trade is how Utah doesnt' want to trade him. That strikes me as nothing but posturing to get a better offer out of team's that have reached out. I'm not pressed for the Spurs to make a huge offer at this moment. I think if they can get him for a few picks then that would be great but it doesn't seem like Utah is dying to trade this guy for some middling first rounders off in the future. Ainge obviously feels like he has leverage here and he's not just going to give in to the first OK offer he gets. The Spurs shouldn't be rushing out to get a deal done now unless the price is right and there's absolutely no indication the price is right ATTM.

I like LM but I don't understand the rush to go out give away the farm for him just yet. People clown the Hawks for their shit move so I would hope they would understand why the Spurs shouldn't rush into the same shit.

To my knowledge, no one has advocated to give away the farm. The Spurs have expanded their farm from 100 acres to 1000 acres. Trading away 100 doesn't mean you gave away the farm.

[MannyIsGod]

Is this Ainge's first season as Utah's CEO? He might be working that same patience grift as PAFTO.

Since taking over, he's made moves to get them from playoff team to treadmill team, with their arrow pointing down. How long it takes him to bottom out will be important, and then how quickly he can build after that is the next (which is the same question the Spurs FO is facing right now).

Its been 2 seasons since they blew it up and they've done well to get assets in that time even if they haven't landed a franchise player. Guess what man, it takes a long time to rebuild a franchise from scratch. Expecting results after 2 years is way more delusional than I expect from you. It's inconsistent AF to hold up Presti while trying to knock down Ainge because Ainge hasnt' built a winner in two years. How long has it taken Presti? A whole hell of a lot longer than two years.

[MannyIsGod]

To my knowledge, no one has advocated to give away the farm. The Spurs have expanded their farm from 100 acres to 1000 acres. Trading away 100 doesn't mean you gave away the farm.

There are plenty of people here advocating going "all in". How else am I supposed to read that other than doing whatever it takes?

[scott]

Its been 2 seasons since they blew it up and they've done well to get assets in that time even if they haven't landed a franchise player. Guess what man, it takes a long time to rebuild a franchise from scratch. Expecting results after 2 years is way more delusional than I expect from you. It's inconsistent AF to hold up Presti while trying to knock down Ainge because Ainge hasnt' built a winner in two years. How long has it taken Presti? A whole hell of a lot longer than two years.

I don't expect anything... I just said he's won on trades before he's won games. This is a fact. That doesn't mean Ainge or PAFTO suck, it just means that its a little premature to be taking victory laps. This relates to Quinn (in a separate tweet) lumping the Spurs, Thunder and Celtics as front offices "who are better than everyone else". But this iteration of the Spurs FO hasn't turned the corner yet, so it's premature to heap that kind of praise on them.

Sounds like you're disagreeing just to disagree.

[Dejounte]

I don't expect anything... I just said he's won on trades before he's won games. This is a fact. That doesn't mean Ainge or PAFTO suck, it just means that its a little premature to be taking victory laps. This relates to Quinn (in a separate tweet) lumping the Spurs, Thunder and Celtics as front offices who are better than everyone else. But this iteration of the Spurs FO hasn't turned the corner yet, so it's premature to heap that kind of praise on them.

Sounds like you're disagreeing just to disagree.

If it’s premature to praise them, is it premature to criticize them?