We Might Need to Accept the Possibility That This Front Office Is Betting on Fox, Wemby, and Castle as the Core

[Dejounte]

Peter J. Holt’s video on small-market discipline got me thinking about where this roster is really heading. If things go the way we hope, and Wemby, Castle, and the number two pick all develop into cornerstone players, then how we manage the next few years financially will decide whether we are setting up for a sustainable core or a future cap logjam.

It is not about doubting Harper’s talent. He is a strong prospect and likely the second pick for a reason. But the reality is, if he hits, and Castle hits, and Wemby continues on his current path, we are setting ourselves up for a moment where four players — Harper, Castle, Wemby, and Fox — are all lined up for major deals within a two-year window.

Here is what the timeline looks like if things go well:



Player
Current Contract
Max Extension Hits


Fox
Likely extended this summer
2024-25


Wemby
Year 2 of rookie deal
2027-28


Castle
Year 1 of rookie deal
2028-29


Harper
Incoming rookie
2029-30



That puts Fox, Wemby, and Castle all on big money by 2028, and if Harper also lives up to expectations, he will be asking for the same right after. That is four major contracts stacking up within two seasons, easily taking up 160 to 175 million of an estimated 180 million cap.

And it is not just about money. Under the new second apron rules, you lose access to key roster-building tools. You cannot use the full mid-level exception, cannot combine salaries in trades, cannot trade picks far out, and more. It becomes extremely difficult to build out the rest of the team, especially for a small market that cannot just spend its way out of mistakes.

Here is what that core salary projection could look like by season:



Season
Fox
Wemby
Castle
Harper
Total Core Salary


2027–28
43M
50M (1st year of max)
10M (rookie)
8M (rookie)
~111M


2028–29
46M
53M
35M (1st year of extension)
12M (rookie)
~146M


2029–30
49M
56M
38M
35M (1st year of extension)
~178M



Some will say not everyone will hit. And that is true. Maybe one of these guys does not become a max-level player. But that is not something you can count on. You do not build around the hope that one of your top four players fails to justify a big contract.

Others might say that is a good problem to have. But we have seen how that plays out. The Thunder had to trade Harden because their timing did not allow for four major extensions. That was not about talent. That was about planning.

And when people bring up Luka or Harden and say you do not pass on talent just because of fit or money, that is also valid if the evaluation is wrong. But in this case, it might not be about passing on a star. It might be about recognizing that your three pillars are already in place and trying to build around them with complementary pieces instead of stacking another potential max contract into an already tight timeline.

This is also where the conversation about De’Aaron Fox is being overlooked. A lot of fans are already looking past him because of the glamour surrounding the number two pick, but the Spurs probably are not. They traded for Fox early and quietly, without waiting to see how the board shook out. That does not look like a wait-and-see move. It looks like commitment. Fox is already a 25 point per game scorer, a proven All-Star, and a two-way player who can take pressure off Wemby now, not three years from now. Harper still has to prove he belongs in that conversation. He may get there, but he also may not. In the meantime, the Spurs may be signaling that they are ready to build around Wemby, Castle, and Fox now, and that requires a different kind of roster planning than just betting on upside.

The Big Three Spurs did not all peak financially at the same time. Duncan took less. Tony and Manu were extended at different points. That staggered structure gave the front office room to build deep teams that contended for years.

Right now, we are on track to have Wemby, Castle, and Fox all hitting their peak contracts at the same time. If Harper joins them in that same window, it may force tough decisions later, either gutting your depth or trading someone you would rather keep.

This is exactly the kind of situation the Spurs have always tried to avoid. They do not spend big just because they can. They plan ahead, stay flexible, and preserve the ability to pivot when the situation demands it. That is what has kept this franchise consistent for decades. And if they want to stay true to that identity, the decisions they make now need to reflect it.

[Mr. Body]

Reason why I was reluctant about getting Fox were that he is limited in his role and was going to cost a ton. His presence removed a lot of flexibility for us. I'm okay with it, because we got him for not a lot, but it was going to create issues. He's not worth a max contract. Barely any players are under this CBA.

[rascal]

Trade Fox when it's time to max Harper

[Dejounte]

Some people are already calling Fox the odd man out. That he is the easiest to move if the money gets tight. But that might be the simplest take in the room.

The Spurs did not just accidentally trade for a 26-year-old All-Star who averaged 26 points and 6 assists last season. They made that move quietly, before the draft, before the free agency market moved, and without waiting to see who fell to them at two. That is not a hedge move. That looks like a front office making a proactive bet.

Fox is not some aging veteran on an inflated deal. He is in his prime, entering a contract year, and already capable of doing what most guards take years to figure out. He gives Wemby relief as a lead creator. He gives Castle space to develop without being rushed into that role too early. And he gives the team actual structure for the next two seasons while everything else takes shape. That matters.

Some have said if Harper earns a max, then the easy call is to move Fox. But think about what that really means. You are betting the future on three players who are all 21 and under, all still developing, still inconsistent, and still figuring out how to win at the NBA level. You are removing your one proven, playoff-caliber initiator just to make the math work. That is not smart roster building. That is repeating what teams like Oklahoma City or Sacramento have done in the past, letting go of key players too soon and assuming development will replace experience.

Fox may not be the long-term face of the franchise, but he might be the player who makes it possible for the others to grow into that. You do not trade that away lightly. You especially do not do it just to create space for a rookie who still has everything to prove.

And honestly, if you think the Spurs would let go of a player like Fox just because things get tight financially, then you probably do not know what this organization stands for. That has never been the culture. This is a franchise that values continuity, trust, and long-term thinking. They do not toss aside veterans who have proven they can lead and produce. They plan ahead. They stagger contracts. They build sustainable cores with flexibility in mind. That is why they have stayed relevant across eras. Letting go of Fox just to make room for another potential max deal would go against everything the Spurs have built their identity on.

[Mr. Body]

Fox will be 28 next December, is small and has a ball-dominant game. He's very clutch and has historically been able to pour in points at times. The last year or so he was hopefully hampered by a bad hand (or else we're screwed).

That's not a max player. Probably Wembanyama is the only max player we'll ever see for this franchise in the current era. It's a completely onerous contract.

The problem with Fox is that he's not a winner on his own, he only plays one position, he's not a great playmaker, he requires a lot of shots, and is only an okay defender. Those are fine generally. If we weren't gifted Harper by the gods, things would be different. It's going to be hard to get enough touches to bring Castle and Harper into their best selves with Fox. Not yet, but eventually, and his price tag is going to become a major burden.

If the Kings wanted to max Fox, he'd still be there. They didn't, so he went hunting for a way to get his money. That's fine; it worked out for us, and probably will be fine. But to be sure the Harper pick makes things very interesting.

[Dejounte]

Fox will be 28 next December, is small and has a ball-dominant game. He's very clutch and has historically been able to pour in points at times. The last year or so he was hopefully hampered by a bad hand (or else we're screwed).

That's not a max player. Probably Wembanyama is the only max player we'll ever see for this franchise in the current era. It's a completely onerous contract.

The problem with Fox is that he's not a winner on his own, he only plays one position, he's not a great playmaker, he requires a lot of shots, and is only an okay defender. Those are fine generally. If we weren't gifted Harper by the gods, things would be different. It's going to be hard to get enough touches to bring Castle and Harper into their best selves with Fox. Not yet, but eventually, and his price tag is going to become a major burden.

If the Kings wanted to max Fox, he'd still be there. They didn't, so he went hunting for a way to get his money. That's fine; it worked out for us, and probably will be fine. But to be sure the Harper pick makes things very interesting.

I think you might be misunderstanding what I was trying to get at.

This isn’t about saying Fox is untouchable or that he’s a max-level superstar in the traditional sense. It’s about what the Spurs might be signaling through their actions. They didn’t bring him in just to be a placeholder. They did it before the draft and before knowing how the board would fall. That suggests they’re confident in his fit alongside Wemby and Castle and that they see value in what he brings over the next few years — even if he’s not a long-term max guy.

More importantly, my post was not pushing the idea that we have to keep Fox no matter what. It was actually raising the possibility that the Spurs might look to trade the number two pick — not because Harper isn’t good, but because they may already feel set with Wemby, Castle, and Fox as their core, and want to avoid stacking another player who will likely require a max deal by 2029.

That’s the whole point. It’s not just about fit today, but about how the money plays out in three or four years. You can only keep so many guys on max or near-max contracts under this new CBA, especially as a small-market team. And if they believe Castle and Wemby are ascending, and Fox gives them structure right now, they may see more value in flipping the 2 for a strong complementary piece and a lower-salaried prospect — rather than adding another high-upside player who’ll create a cap collision down the line.

The Harper hype is real, and maybe the Spurs will take him anyway and figure it out later. But I don’t think they’re just ignoring the future implications of carrying four big-money players. If anything, I think they’re planning for that now.

[vy65]

Based on current projections, the NBA salary cap, luxury tax, and apron levels for the 2029-2030 season are expected to be significantly higher than they are now.

Here are the projected figures:

Salary Cap: $227,081,910

Luxury Tax Threshold: $275,952,075

First Apron: $287,725,122

Second Apron: $305,167,663

Important Note:

These are projections and based on the assumption of a 10% annual increase in the salary cap from the 2025-26 season onwards. This assumes sustained growth in basketball-related income, which is largely influenced by factors like the league's media rights deals.

Google AI, so take it for what it’s worth, but there’d be ~100MM to load out the rest of the roster before hitting the tax and almost 115MM before the first apron. You likely pay the tax and maybe even hit the apron if you have 4 max guys because you’re likely winning a fuckton of games.

Also, what’s the point of this thread? No one is suggesting we trade Fox in the near term. Are you saying don’t take Harper? Don’t trade for KD?

[K...]

Going forwards teams are going to know what we have and make an offer. Doesn't necessarily have to be a trade to avoid the tax.

Also the spurs have time to work the agents and find who would take less.

[itzsoweezee]

If the Kings wanted to max Fox, he'd still be there. They didn't, so he went hunting for a way to get his money.

lol. What is this imaginary world you live in?

[exstatic]

Passing on high end talent is always the wrong idea. Exchanging it for much higher paid veterans accelerates the cap crunch, the divesting of role players like has happened to MIL and DEN he last few years, and shortens the window.

[Dejounte]

Google AI, so take it for what it’s worth, but there’d be ~100MM to load out the rest of the roster before hitting the tax and almost 115MM before the first apron. You likely pay the tax and maybe even hit the apron if you have 4 max guys because you’re likely winning a fuckton of games.

Also, what’s the point of this thread? No one is suggesting we trade Fox in the near term. Are you saying don’t take Harper? Don’t trade for KD?

The cap projections are real and yeah, the room will grow. But the conversation isn’t just about whether you can afford four big contracts — it’s about what kind of team that leaves you with under the current CBA. Once you hit that second apron territory, you’re dealing with major restrictions. It’s not just about tax dollars, it’s about not being able to use trade exceptions, aggregate salaries, sign-and-trade, or access the midlevel. It locks you into a path with very little flexibility, and the Spurs have never operated that way.

A KD trade wouldn’t hurt the long-term plan because his deal would likely be off the books before the extensions for Castle and Wemby even kick in, and definitely before Harper’s if they drafted him. So it’s more of a short-term competitive push than a future cap problem. That kind of move actually lines up with trying to stay clean financially around your core while still pushing to win now.

On Harper:
Look, I get this is not the take most people here want to hear. Everyone’s locked in on Harper’s upside and talent. Not denying that. But the point of this thread is more about how the Spurs might be thinking long-term. They already traded for Fox. They clearly believe in Castle and obviously Wemby. If they see that trio as the foundation, they may not want to lock in a fourth player who’s going to be up for a max right around the same time.

It’s not about underrating Harper. It’s about managing the timeline. Having four guys all lining up for massive contracts by 2029 creates real pressure, especially for a team that doesn’t operate like a tax-paying juggernaut. That pressure leads to forced trades or losing depth. And maybe they’d rather avoid that altogether.

So yeah, Harper could hit. But that doesn’t mean the Spurs aren’t also thinking about how they want to build around the players they’ve already committed to. Trading down from 2 might not be about talent — it might be about balance, fit, and setting things up so they’re not stuck in a hard cap corner a few years from now.

[ginobilized]

Peter J. Holt’s video on small-market discipline got me thinking about where this roster is really heading. If things go the way we hope, and Wemby, Castle, and the number two pick all develop into cornerstone players, then how we manage the next few years financially will decide whether we are setting up for a sustainable core or a future cap logjam.

It is not about doubting Harper’s talent. He is a strong prospect and likely the second pick for a reason. But the reality is, if he hits, and Castle hits, and Wemby continues on his current path, we are setting ourselves up for a moment where four players — Harper, Castle, Wemby, and Fox — are all lined up for major deals within a two-year window.

Here is what the timeline looks like if things go well:



Player
Current Contract
Max Extension Hits


Fox
Likely extended this summer
2024-25


Wemby
Year 2 of rookie deal
2027-28


Castle
Year 1 of rookie deal
2028-29


Harper
Incoming rookie
2029-30



That puts Fox, Wemby, and Castle all on big money by 2028, and if Harper also lives up to expectations, he will be asking for the same right after. That is four major contracts stacking up within two seasons, easily taking up 160 to 175 million of an estimated 180 million cap.

And it is not just about money. Under the new second apron rules, you lose access to key roster-building tools. You cannot use the full mid-level exception, cannot combine salaries in trades, cannot trade picks far out, and more. It becomes extremely difficult to build out the rest of the team, especially for a small market that cannot just spend its way out of mistakes.

Here is what that core salary projection could look like by season:



Season
Fox
Wemby
Castle
Harper
Total Core Salary


2027–28
43M
50M (1st year of max)
10M (rookie)
8M (rookie)
~111M


2028–29
46M
53M
35M (1st year of extension)
12M (rookie)
~146M


2029–30
49M
56M
38M
35M (1st year of extension)
~178M



Some will say not everyone will hit. And that is true. Maybe one of these guys does not become a max-level player. But that is not something you can count on. You do not build around the hope that one of your top four players fails to justify a big contract.

Others might say that is a good problem to have. But we have seen how that plays out. The Thunder had to trade Harden because their timing did not allow for four major extensions. That was not about talent. That was about planning.

And when people bring up Luka or Harden and say you do not pass on talent just because of fit or money, that is also valid if the evaluation is wrong. But in this case, it might not be about passing on a star. It might be about recognizing that your three pillars are already in place and trying to build around them with complementary pieces instead of stacking another potential max contract into an already tight timeline.

This is also where the conversation about De’Aaron Fox is being overlooked. A lot of fans are already looking past him because of the glamour surrounding the number two pick, but the Spurs probably are not. They traded for Fox early and quietly, without waiting to see how the board shook out. That does not look like a wait-and-see move. It looks like commitment. Fox is already a 25 point per game scorer, a proven All-Star, and a two-way player who can take pressure off Wemby now, not three years from now. Harper still has to prove he belongs in that conversation. He may get there, but he also may not. In the meantime, the Spurs may be signaling that they are ready to build around Wemby, Castle, and Fox now, and that requires a different kind of roster planning than just betting on upside.

The Big Three Spurs did not all peak financially at the same time. Duncan took less. Tony and Manu were extended at different points. That staggered structure gave the front office room to build deep teams that contended for years.

Right now, we are on track to have Wemby, Castle, and Fox all hitting their peak contracts at the same time. If Harper joins them in that same window, it may force tough decisions later, either gutting your depth or trading someone you would rather keep.

This is exactly the kind of situation the Spurs have always tried to avoid. They do not spend big just because they can. They plan ahead, stay flexible, and preserve the ability to pivot when the situation demands it. That is what has kept this franchise consistent for decades. And if they want to stay true to that identity, the decisions they make now need to reflect it.

Well thought out and highly plausible. If it plays out this way, the Spurs would very likely be trading #2 to a team in the East. Philly, Charlotte, Wiz, Nets and Raptors would be possible choices.

However this draft plays out, the Spurs will be showing us their vision for this team's future.

[Knoxxx]

A couple things. First off that’s not our problem as fans, though I know that is a thing for us to over worry about it and shoot down bad contract acquiring trades when we have nothing better to do and as our duty to over analyze things.

If the core 4 of Harper and the existing 3 works well, all but Wemby need to consider whether it is worth a little less dough if that is what it takes to keep the team together. That has been the Spurs way.

Back over to Fox, we want him to be the clear 2 in the near term. That increases the chance that both of Harper and Castle don’t quite have the stats to insist on max money.

Finally, if the core 4 doesn’t work, such as 3 guards not being the ticket, one can be dealt as they will be marketable. The biggest question mark there may be how well Fox’s game built on lightning speed ages, but he’s a real specimen so it is probably too early to worry about that.

And given the realities of the new cap rules, max deals either become rarer or salary cap growth is enough to support them. With Wemby as the new face of the NBA on a competitive team, I’m bullish on the NBA becoming more popular not less. There is no better experience for the casual fan than watching an alien do alien things deep into the playoffs. Making large grown men look like children by comparison on the court.

If anyone can manage the situation well SAS can. OK that was more than a couple things.

[rascal]

What are you worried about? There's time to figure things out. Draft Harper because he has the most upside of any of the Spurs backcourt players and see how it plays out.
You don't move off your top backcourt prospect.

You're talking about 2029, there's plenty of time, way in the future and the Spurs will find a solution to your worries.

You don't pass on high end upside talent(by trading down for lesser talent, I know you want Kon out of this draft) that are top 2 lottery picks. Teams don't often have a chance to build around two top 2 prospects(Wemby and Harper) like the Spurs now have.

[Dejounte]

Passing on high end talent is always the wrong idea. Exchanging it for much higher paid veterans accelerates the cap crunch, the divesting of role players like has happened to MIL and DEN he last few years, and shortens the window.

That logic works in a lot of situations, but it’s not that simple here. The Spurs aren’t trying to dump the pick for an aging vet or go all-in for a one-year window. If they move off 2, it would be because they believe they already have a foundation in Wemby, Castle, and Fox — and stacking another likely max player into that mix could create a financial squeeze down the line that limits flexibility.

This isn’t about undervaluing talent. It’s about managing timing and cost. The new CBA hits teams hard when multiple big contracts overlap — and small-market teams don’t get to play the same game as the Warriors or Clippers. Denver and Milwaukee lost key depth not because they lacked talent, but because they didn’t have the flexibility to keep it.

If the Spurs move the pick, they’re likely targeting a lower-salaried player who fits cleanly alongside their core — not someone who accelerates a cap problem. It’s not the flashy move, but it’s the kind of roster balance that gives them more room to adjust as Wemby and Castle take the next step. And let’s not forget, they literally traded the 8th pick last year for a future first instead of adding another high-upside player to the roster. That wasn’t about talent — that was about timing. This front office has shown they’re willing to pass on “more now” to stay in control of the bigger picture.

[exstatic]

The cap projections are real and yeah, the room will grow. But the conversation isn’t just about whether you can afford four big contracts — it’s about what kind of team that leaves you with under the current CBA. Once you hit that second apron territory, you’re dealing with major restrictions. It’s not just about tax dollars, it’s about not being able to use trade exceptions, aggregate salaries, sign-and-trade, or access the midlevel. It locks you into a path with very little flexibility, and the Spurs have never operated that way.

A KD trade wouldn’t hurt the long-term plan because his deal would likely be off the books before the extensions for Castle and Wemby even kick in, and definitely before Harper’s if they drafted him. So it’s more of a short-term competitive push than a future cap problem. That kind of move actually lines up with trying to stay clean financially around your core while still pushing to win now.

On Harper:
Look, I get this is not the take most people here want to hear. Everyone’s locked in on Harper’s upside and talent. Not denying that. But the point of this thread is more about how the Spurs might be thinking long-term. They already traded for Fox. They clearly believe in Castle and obviously Wemby. If they see that trio as the foundation, they may not want to lock in a fourth player who’s going to be up for a max right around the same time.

It’s not about underrating Harper. It’s about managing the timeline. Having four guys all lining up for massive contracts by 2029 creates real pressure, especially for a team that doesn’t operate like a tax-paying juggernaut. That pressure leads to forced trades or losing depth. And maybe they’d rather avoid that altogether.

So yeah, Harper could hit. But that doesn’t mean the Spurs aren’t also thinking about how they want to build around the players they’ve already committed to. Trading down from 2 might not be about talent — it might be about balance, fit, and setting things up so they’re not stuck in a hard cap corner a few years from now.

I agree that you don’t have four simultaneous big contracts. Where we disagree is in choosing a 31 YO Fox over a 23 YO Harper, which you are essentially doing by not drafting him, and taking those cheap first four years.

[Knoxxx]

I didn’t know Castle/Harper rookie extension was only $35M that’s peanuts. $100 million to fill 8 more roster spots sounds feasible, that’s $12 million per player. NBA salaries are not egalitarian, there are large differences in salary between stars and role players. Also big men salaries have been pretty low I see this as pretty workable.

[picnroll]

Not sure the way the CBA is structured with a punitive second apron the Spurs are in or will be in any different situation than any other team, small or large market who are fortunate to land three players of max or near max quality. KC and Houston will very soon hit the salary cap wall with their players and will have some hard decisions to make. They’re both in the fortunate position of having a stock pile of picks and they can shed players going forward to replenish themselves using these shed players to acquire more picks. Spurs are actually probably most lucky in that their super max player is or most likely will soon be the apex predator, most bang for the buck of their max salary player and they also have some stockpile of picks. They too will have to develop and shed some pla yers to maintain success. If they all develop one or more of Fox, Castle and Harper if he’s drafted for picks or player’s, maybe not quite as talented players but ones that fit a need and are on a good contract like Trey Murphy III. Based on the current playoffs where strong versatile depth is critical like the Pacers have maybe the best formula is to have money spread around an alpha male and a host of stong supporting players.

[Knoxxx]

8 players at $100 million gives you 4 guys earning $20 million apiece and 4 more so end of bench guys earning $20 million total. + or -, that seems to work? Ok throw in three minimum salary to fill the 15 man and a little more for 3 two way players. It’s tight but still sounds workable.

[Dejounte]

https://youtu.be/wyCq7PIUPQQ?feature=shared

I know this was shared in another thread but it is worth bringing up again here. The Spurs have been clear for years about their philosophy and Peter’s comments in this video just reinforce that. Their actions follow a pattern and none of it should be surprising. They have been consistent in how they build and how they make decisions and this is just more of the same.

[baseline bum]

More importantly, my post was not pushing the idea that we have to keep Fox no matter what. It was actually raising the possibility that the Spurs might look to trade the number two pick — not because Harper isn’t good, but because they may already feel set with Wemby, Castle, and Fox as their core, and want to avoid stacking another player who will likely require a max deal by 2029.

I think that's a horrible idea and is counting their chickens before they hatch. If Castle never gets a good jumpshot then he's going to be more a role player in the mold of Jason Hart than say a star in the mold of Jalen Brunson. Passing on Harper is lunacy, especially when Steph is still an unknown. You can kick the can of having to pick which two to pay between Fox, Castle, and Harper down the road four years when you have a much clearer idea what you have and you can easily pay all three of them plus Wemby until then.

[Dejounte]

I agree that you don’t have four simultaneous big contracts. Where we disagree is in choosing a 31 YO Fox over a 23 YO Harper, which you are essentially doing by not drafting him, and taking those cheap first four years.

That’s not really the choice this thread is about. You’re framing it like it’s a matter of picking between a 31-year-old Fox and a 23-year-old Harper down the line — but the point is the Spurs might be building in a way where they never put themselves in that position to begin with.

By trading for Fox now and betting on Wemby and Castle, they may be structuring the roster to avoid having four overlapping max deals later. It’s not about choosing one player over another in 2029 — it’s about making a decision in 2024 that avoids a cap crunch and a forced decision five years from now. That’s the kind of planning this front office has always prioritized.

[Dejounte]

I think that's a horrible idea and is counting their chickens before they hatch. If Castle never gets a good jumpshot then he's going to be more a role player in the mold of Jason Hart than say a star in the mold of Jalen Brunson. Passing on Harper is lunacy, especially when Steph is still an unknown. You can kick the can of having to pick which two to pay between Fox, Castle, and Harper down the road four years when you have a much clearer idea what you have and you can easily pay all three of them plus Wemby until then.You’re cautioning against counting chickens but then doing the same by projecting Castle as a role player and Harper as a guaranteed star. The reality is they both still have things to prove. The only difference is the team already has Castle in the building, developing in their system, and showing signs they clearly like.

The idea here isn’t fear of Harper or taking the safe route. It’s about staying aligned with how the team has operated for years— building around a core they believe in and making sure they don’t end up boxed in later. It’s not about being afraid to make a hard decision down the road. It’s about setting things up so you might not have to.

[Dejounte]

Judging by the posts so far, it looks like most are strongly opposed to the ideas in this thread. Trust me, I get it. But I’m also pretty sure that everything laid out here is something a lot of you have at least considered, even if just in the back of your mind. It might sound too wild to take seriously because it feels unprecedented. Why would the Spurs pass on elite talent? Why would they make a move like that when a potential star is sitting right there?

That reaction makes sense.

But I’ll say this: after last year’s draft night, anything is possible with this front office.

[Ariel]

I could see the Spurs moving the 2nd pick if they don't feel Harper is the best long term prospect, or if there is some very shady behavior behind the scenes from Harper's camp. Other than that, they'd be making a franchise altering gamble with little to no data available, in anticipation of a scenario that might not happen at all and, even if it did, would not only be manageable but even desirable. It would feel reckless, negligent, and I'd lose a lot of faith in this front office. Hopefully that is not the case.

[couchman]

The real question for me isn’t Fox, he’s a proven performer.
We have Fox and Wemby.
People are rushing to put Castle in that category but he’s not there yet and I don’t think it is a given.
I think before the lottery the Spurs front office needed to plan on Fox, Wemby, Castle and hope that Castle gets there.
But now we have an insurance policy w Harper.
Lets Castle and Harper battle it out and send someone out once the dust settles.
My moneys on Harper btw.

[Seventyniner]

I bet this is exactly the way the Spurs were planning the future...until they struck silver in the lottery.

I would rather trade Castle than the #2 pick, but that would be out of character for the organization.

Gotta take into account the possibility that Castle doesn't put up enough stats to command a max extension with Wemby and Fox around. Even more so if the Spurs trade for KD and keep Harper.

[Chinook]

That's why it's essential that the Spurs don't give out max extensions just going through the motions. What it means to be a max player has changed now that teams basically can't have three of them on a team at the same time. If the Spurs don't think Fox can be a top-two player on a title team, they shouldn't give him a max. Let him go into the season without an extension and see if his play warrants it. If Castle only wants to extend on a rookie max, then go into the next off-season and let someone offer him a contract. If Wemby has another injury scare next year, don't write in Rose-max language into his extension.

If the guys end up signing for like $8-15 Million less per year than the maxes, all of the sudden it becomes much easier to fit in the role-players and/or keep three of the stars. As I've said before, Castle may well develop into a very good player who can be that third guy on a contender and still only sign a $200M/5 because third-guys aren't max-guys and with RFA matching rights, teams might not be willing to negotiate for the Spurs. I think folks too often think of the lotto guys as either pass or fail rather than them becoming vets with a certain market value as they develop.

Anyway, the Spurs should be aiming to remain flexible. That means keeping as many of their picks as possible so they can continuously have fresh blood on their bench. That's even more true during the four "double years" the team has coming up. It also means being wiling to trade away some of their guys, both to "break them into smaller parts" and gain more assets and cheaper role-players and to find win-now players who might boost the team for a couple of years rather than be part of the long-term rebuild. Unless the team lucks into a trio of guys who are willing to make the money work to stay together throughout their careers, the front office is not going to be able to put a group together and just coast for a decade. Even if they do find that kind of trio, they'll need to be even more diligent in maintaining young and cheap players around them. They can't be like the old Spurs and piss away draft picks constantly because they had the same group of 5-8 guys for years at a time.

[baseline bum]

You’re cautioning against counting chickens but then doing the same by projecting Castle as a role player and Harper as a guaranteed star. The reality is they both still have things to prove. The only difference is the team already has Castle in the building, developing in their system, and showing signs they clearly like.

The idea here isn’t fear of Harper or taking the safe route. It’s about staying aligned with how the team has operated for years— building around a core they believe in and making sure they don’t end up boxed in later. It’s not about being afraid to make a hard decision down the road. It’s about setting things up so you might not have to.

No I'm not, I'm saying you have four years to figure out instead of making a stupid and rash decision now.

[Ice009]

https://youtu.be/wyCq7PIUPQQ?feature=shared

I know this was shared in another thread but it is worth bringing up again here. The Spurs have been clear for years about their philosophy and Peter’s comments in this video just reinforce that. Their actions follow a pattern and none of it should be surprising. They have been consistent in how they build and how they make decisions and this is just more of the same.

What was said in the video? I don't have time to watch it. Did he discuss the draft, free agency or anything like that? If not, it doesn't really mean anything. They could still do anything come draft day.

[scottspurs]

lol Don Harris literally talked to Holt and then reported Harper will be the pick at #2. Dylan Harper will be drafted and kept by the Spurs. He called it an informed opinion. Spurs are drafting Harper and all other opinions or concepts people are coming up with are coming from a place of boredom. Everyone can keep coming up with reasons the Spurs won’t draft Harper and they will be wrong.

[scottspurs]

Holt says in this video the Spurs paid the luxury tax 8 times during the big 3 era and they are prepared to do so again in the future. They are bringing in new money to prepare for it.

[scottspurs]

Michael Dell is on board now. Several other high profile investors. France money will come in. The Spurs sent Wemby to become a monk to bring in China money. Spurs are a global brand on the rise. Small thinking leads to small results. The Spurs are thinking big. Dylan Harper is going to bring that Filipino money.

[scottspurs]

Investors the Spurs have brought in over the last several years:




Michael Dell: CEO and founder of Dell Technologies, a significant minority investor.

Sixth Street: A leading global investment firm, also a significant minority investor.

Joe Gebbia: Co-founder and Chairman of Airbnb.org, also a minority owner.

Kimberly Lewis: Founder of investment management company KSL Resources, a minority owner.

McCombs Family: Rejoined the Spurs ownership group in 2023, after a previous ownership stake.

Paul Viera: Increased his stake in the Spurs.

Other Strategic Partners: The Spurs investor group also includes other strategic partners, including EARNEST Partners and McCombs Family

David Robinson is also investing heavily in the team.


​

[scottspurs]

The Spurs are thinking Dynasty:

Victor Wembanyama

Project Marvel

New NBA TV money is coming. Main attraction being the Face of the League.

1st Apron

2nd Apron

3rd Apron

Austin Tech Based money

Saudi Arabia

China

France

Global Expansion

Championships

Dylan Harper is a piece of puzzle.

[Pauleta14]

I agree with OP, it's my feeling as well

Taking Harper could be greedy in a way, Spurs already have Castle, a perfect profile to develop and Fox is at a stage of his career that makes him a perfect fit to start winning NOW and be a leader. Why bring another lefty PD with a lot of hype? What type of message is he supposed to receive, just when he's supposed to sign an extension?

The timing doesn't make sense

We already have so many needs to fill especially at the wing, bigs(backup and to pair with Wemby) and shooting, why add another guard who has the same strengths and weaknesses than the ones we already have?

Pick 2 could bring us a lot more because of Harper's (over?)hype and so many desperate teams ready to (over)pay for him.

[dn0774]

Drafting Harper is not only great from a talent standpoint (legit All-NBA potential), it is also a good move for the financials. His salary is cost controlled his first 4 years and gives time to make the necessary evaluations going forward. Harper and Castle both need big time work in terms of shooting (neither looks like a pure shooter and both have disappointing shooting splits). Expecting both of them to become knock down shooters is just a very unlikely outcome, chances are higher that 1 or none of them do.

If both guys figure the shooting out a bit then yea, the front office will have some big decisions to make in a couple of years. But that would be a great outcome and would likely mean we've had some awesome team success as a result. That being said, the Spurs recent history in developing players honestly hasn't been stellar; Sochan has been stagnant, Vassell has seemingly regressed, KJ peaked early and stagnated. Even Wemby himself has gone through his share of ups and downs where offensively he is the mercy of whether his 3s fall or not, hasn't really felt like actual development has taken place at times.

[scottspurs]

According to Forbes fhe Spurs are valued at 3.85 Billion an 18% increase since 2021. Tied for 9th in increased value. They have risen from the 25th most valued franchise to 18th. They are on the rise since the new investors have come in. That will continue to sky rocket. We might need to prepare for that.

[Splits]

Fox is a nice player, top-10 PG in the league and entering his prime. But the idea he is a "max player" under this CBA is ludicrous. He's made one ASG in 8 seasons. That's not a "max player".

[rankingtear]

Eh they need a wing creator being guard heavy alienates the alien from the offense reliant on ball screens.

[Mnky]

Might need to accept the front office is betting on their 3 best players? This is a new flash? :lol

In no world does Harper interfere with that plan. Harper is the perfect insurance for Fox or Castle not working out. You flip whoever doesn't if need be.

[RC_Drunkford]

I agree with Dejounte (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=51342) as I said before, I believe the Spurs are trading down from #2.

The way I see it Wemby/Castle/Fox is the main core and Castle is viewed as Wemby's longtime running mate. If the Spurs think Castle has indeed SGA type potential, then it makes sense to see the Wemby/Castle duo as the longtime building block. The new CBA basically only allows you to have 2 max contracts on the books if you want to build a roster with depth.

People seem to have this notion that we gon somehow replicate the Ducan-era, which is basically impossible under this CBA agreement. If you want to have a 10-15 year run, the key is to have role players on cheap contracts.

Where we are set up at, is that we have plenty of swaps, which should allow us to pick at a higher position, so we can add good young role players on rookie contracts. Maybe we'll find one future All-Star if we strike gold, who would then be on a different contractual timeline than Wemby/Castle.

What we don't have is extra picks to make trades for roster adjustments. That means offloading bad contracts and trading for role players on good contracts. Free agency is basically dead and you have to trade for those players. It's mandatory to not trade out 4 future firsts and end up like Denver or Milwaukee, where you are stuck with an MVP caliber player, but can't put a good enough roster around him.

Which brings me to the point that trading down from #2 makes sense if:

- you get a haul of future first round draft picks that you can use to reload the roster in the future
- you get borderline All-Stars/All-Defensive players on good long term contracts (Trey Murphy III for example)
- you draft a player in the top 10 with All-Star like potential, but won't demand a max extention

Someone like Maluach, who would basically be viewed as Wemby's back up (even if he starts next to him and then gets staggered minutes), would most likely not get a max extension. That means you can probably retain him for another 5 years.

The Spurs need to think in windows. A KD trade opens the window earlier, then comes off the books when Wemby and Castle are seasoned. At that point you try to find the next guy to add to get you over the top. Once Fox is too old, they need to find the next guy, and so on.

I'm not against drafting Harper, but people here act like he's a surefire All-NBA PG already. Castle is a proven NBA player and won the title in college. Harper didn't make the tournament. Yes, Harper's intangibles are intriguing and he's the safest pick in the draft, but that doesn't mean he will be the second best player out of this draft. Also if his off the dribble shooting doesn't come around, his ceiling will be significantly lower than what people think it is.

And I don't think a clash of egos is out of the question. Drafting Harper is basically telling Fox "you are gone in 4 years if this kid pans out". Meanwhile Harper would have less touches for 4 straight seasons and has to start the season in a sixth man role. This kid is highly competitive.

Trading down might actually be the smarter move, but it's also the riskier one.

[RC_Drunkford]

8 players at $100 million gives you 4 guys earning $20 million apiece and 4 more so end of bench guys earning $20 million total. + or -, that seems to work? Ok throw in three minimum salary to fill the 15 man and a little more for 3 two way players. It’s tight but still sounds workable.

these are the accurate extension numbers of Wemby, Fox, Castle, Harper with the salary cap and luxury tax lines. 29/30 is obviously the critical year. This would work in theory, if you are willing to trade away Fox in 2029 which would be the plan for most people on this board, I assume.

https://i.ibb.co/yn1w4mRt/Spurs-Harper-extension.jpg

[jesterbobman]

It's possible. I think Fox was a fine / good trade - more juice at PG, cost two valuable picks (plus the Chicago pick that would've ended up valuable) and got off Collins' deal.

Harper isn't a sure thing.

But he's viewed as close to a sure thing, you win with star level creation, and he's big enough to be a wing sized creator that can't be hunted on D by size mismatches.

If they don't believe in the jumper, I get selling if you get a kings ransom. But that's a kings ransom of some combination of high value future value (a bunch of unprotected picks from teams that project to be terrible and have limited avenues to get good), current draft value (high pick to get Tre / Kon etc), and a improvement of the current roster.

If you said the Spurs moved down to 5, got Lauri, the 2031 Phoenix pick(note - Unprotected - I think), for Barnes / Keldon / 2, I think that's close - not sure if I do it given Lauri's signed up for Long term now at about his $ value. But it's close.

[Dejounte]

these are the accurate extension numbers of Wemby, Fox, Castle, Harper with the salary cap and luxury tax lines. 29/30 is obviously the critical year. This would work in theory, if you are willing to trade away Fox in 2029 which would be the plan for most people on this board, I assume.

https://i.ibb.co/yn1w4mRt/Spurs-Harper-extension.jpg

A lot of people seem to think the plan is to just trade Fox in 2029, but that kind of move usually only happens when a team has hit its ceiling or something goes wrong behind the scenes. If Fox is still producing and the team is in the playoffs, possibly making deep runs, it would be strange to pull the plug just because another player is due for a payday.

This isn’t a situation that sneaks up on you either. You’ve had years to plan for that moment, which is why the real decision point is now. Choosing to draft Harper means accepting that you might be forced into a tough call later. Choosing not to could be about avoiding that situation altogether.

[RC_Drunkford]

A lot of people seem to think the plan is to just trade Fox in 2029, but that kind of move usually only happens when a team has hit its ceiling or something goes wrong behind the scenes. If Fox is still producing and the team is in the playoffs, possibly making deep runs, it would be strange to pull the plug just because another player is due for a payday.

This isn’t a situation that sneaks up on you either. You’ve had years to plan for that moment, which is why the real decision point is now. Choosing to draft Harper means accepting that you might be forced into a tough call later. Choosing not to could be about avoiding that situation altogether.

exactly and as I said this might cause some friction down the line. Also if Fox is still producing in 2029 at age 31, you don't know what's gon happen. Tony Parker was 31 in 2014 and All-NBA second team. If you draft a star wing at #5 or #7 the fit would be significantly better. It just comes down to hitting that pick out the park and I can understand why people don't trust our FO to do that.

[Dejounte]

Just to clarify, I’m not in favor of trading the second pick just to move off it. But if the pick is drawing strong offers from other teams that put the Spurs in a better long-term position, it needs to be considered.

Brooklyn holds picks 8 and 19 in this draft. A package including those two selections, a player like Nic Claxton for immediate frontcourt value, and multiple future first-round picks from the Nets could be the type of return that sets the team up well. Those future picks could become the next Dylan Harper-level talent, but on a rookie contract that better aligns with the timelines of Wemby, Castle, and potentially Fox.

If the Spurs are going to pass on Harper, it has to be because the offer on the table gives them a stronger path forward across multiple seasons.

[RC_Drunkford]

Just to clarify, I’m not in favor of trading the second pick just to move off it. But if the pick is drawing strong offers from other teams that put the Spurs in a better long-term position, it needs to be considered.

Brooklyn holds picks 8 and 19 in this draft. A package including those two selections, a player like Nic Claxton for immediate frontcourt value, and multiple future first-round picks from the Nets could be the type of return that sets the team up well. Those future picks could become the next Dylan Harper-level talent, but on a rookie contract that better aligns with the timelines of Wemby, Castle, and potentially Fox.

If the Spurs are going to pass on Harper, it has to be because the offer on the table gives them a stronger path forward across multiple seasons.

the way I see it is they will make it a bidding war mainly between NOLA, Utah and Brooklyn. Whoever offers the most. If the offer is too good to pass up, the Spurs might bite. But they will want a massive haul if they do.

[rankingtear]

Downhill lead guard and a shot creating wing next to wembananas. We are loading up on downhill lead guards and have zero wing prospects. We would end up like the next MEM, UTA, CLE at this point 50 win teams with no playoff wing to make a deep run. Trade Scoot 2.0 for draft capital or a wing or forward iso scorer.

[vy65]

Just to clarify, I’m not in favor of trading the second pick just to move off it. But if the pick is drawing strong offers from other teams that put the Spurs in a better long-term position, it needs to be considered.

Brooklyn holds picks 8 and 19 in this draft. A package including those two selections, a player like Nic Claxton for immediate frontcourt value, and multiple future first-round picks from the Nets could be the type of return that sets the team up well. Those future picks could become the next Dylan Harper-level talent, but on a rookie contract that better aligns with the timelines of Wemby, Castle, and potentially Fox.

If the Spurs are going to pass on Harper, it has to be because the offer on the table gives them a stronger path forward across multiple seasons.

This thread is crazy. You don’t pass up projected all nba team talent because you might have financial problems in the future. You don’t know what’s going to happen 4 years from now: maybe Castle and/or Harper doesn’t reach max-contract level status, maybe Fox asks out again, maybe all four are willing to take discounts, etc. This is the galaxy brain shit that would sink a front office.

More to the point, if Brooklyn offered 8, 19, Clayton, and unprotected picks in 26, 28, and 30, then maybe you do that. I’m still not sure though since Scott has shown the value of those picks waivers over time. Plus, I’d expect Brooklyn to assemble an actual team in the event they sold their future to the Spurs. What’s more, I’m not even sure they’re getting those sorts of offers in the first place.

[scottspurs]

The Current NBA CBA ends in 2030. The new 76 billion dollar tv deal starts this next season. The entire NBA is about to change. Wemby will be the face of it. The Spurs Franchise and everyone that invest is about to get incredibly rich. They are not going to make short sighted decisions like passing on Dylan Harper. Would they also pass on Cooper Flagg? The answer is no.

This actually gives the Spurs a competitive advantage because they can lock up all their Star players to long term deals before the start of the new CBA. The cap always goes up significantly when new deals are signed. By 2030 if Harper, Castle and Wemby are healthy and develop properly they will get extensions. The Spurs will have them signed under the current situation just in time for them to move the cap and tax levels way up. The only way the plan would fail is if the league loses its positive momentum as the top rising sport in the world.

The Spurs are bringing in new money to prepare for what comes next financially. They have to rise to the top of the league in order to have the revenue coming back to be able to pay for it all. To make a profit. You don’t reach the top by passing on top players on cheap rookie contracts. Not when you are an under .500 team. You have to keep adding positive pieces. Pieces that generate revenue.

if it fails you can always shed the salary later, The Celtics are about to do it this offseason. Would they be doing that if they repeated this year. No. They would have doubled down. Same as the Warriors did during their run.

Short-sighted decisions won’t lead to long term success. The Spurs are drafting Dylan Harper and the only way that doesn’t happen is if the Mavericks pick him #1 or the Spurs like someone better. Not because they are worried about future financial responsibility. Y’all are bored/fatigued with the off-season already and coming up with unrealistic expectations.

[exstatic]

exactly and as I said this might cause some friction down the line. Also if Fox is still producing in 2029 at age 31, you don't know what's gon happen. Tony Parker was 31 in 2014 and All-NBA second team. If you draft a star wing at #5 or #7 the fit would be significantly better. It just comes down to hitting that pick out the park and I can understand why people don't trust our FO to do that.

If you draft a star wing at #5 or #7,you’re still going to have to pay that player in 2029, and that’s still going to push Fox out the door. It’s not just Harper at his position doing the pushing,it’s the money in this era of the second apron. Better to actually have a positional player to backfill anyway.

Take the better bet in Harper,instead of hoping some prospective wing prospect pops and hits his 99% outcome.

[scottspurs]

If you draft a star wing at #5 or #7,you’re still going to have to pay that player in 2029, and that’s still going to push Fox out the door. It’s not just Harper at his position doing the pushing,it’s the money in this era of the second apron. Better to actually have a positional player to backfill anyway.

Take the better bet in Harper,instead of hoping some prospective wing prospect pops and hits his 99% outcome.

Exactly this! If the Spurs are worried about the future financials they would trade out of the draft all together. If they pick a player in a trade down that is just as good as Harper they will also be giving them the max. The short sightedness of these scenarios reeks of off-season fatigue. Just be patient and wait to see how it plays out.

[Dejounte]

This thread is crazy. You don’t pass up projected all nba team talent because you might have financial problems in the future. You don’t know what’s going to happen 4 years from now: maybe Castle and/or Harper doesn’t reach max-contract level status, maybe Fox asks out again, maybe all four are willing to take discounts, etc. This is the galaxy brain shit that would sink a front office.

More to the point, if Brooklyn offered 8, 19, Clayton, and unprotected picks in 26, 28, and 30, then maybe you do that. I’m still not sure though since Scott has shown the value of those picks waivers over time. Plus, I’d expect Brooklyn to assemble an actual team in the event they sold their future to the Spurs. What’s more, I’m not even sure they’re getting those sorts of offers in the first place.

It’s true that part of the thinking here involves looking ahead at possible financial overlap, but it’s not about fear of paying players. It’s about recognizing that if the front office already views Wemby, Castle, and Fox as their core, then locking in another potential max player just a year later might force tough decisions they’d rather avoid altogether. That’s not panicking. That’s planning.

And moves like this have worked before. Boston traded out of the number one pick in 2017, took Tatum at three, and got an extra first out of it. They had a young core in place and made a bet based on fit, not hype. That wasn’t a flashy move at the time, but it aged perfectly.

If a deal like 8, 19, Claxton, and multiple future firsts is on the table, it deserves serious thought. You get depth, flexibility, and maybe even another high-upside player in the future who fits the financial window better. And if those offers don’t materialize, sure, take Harper and figure it out later. But acting like exploring these options is front office malpractice misses the point entirely.

Harper is a big-time talent, but if the Spurs believe they already have their core and want to preserve flexibility to build around it, then moving the pick could be the smarter long-term play. It’s not overthinking. It’s just seeing the bigger picture.

[Dejounte]

The Current NBA CBA ends in 2030. The new 76 billion dollar tv deal starts this next season. The entire NBA is about to change. Wemby will be the face of it. The Spurs Franchise and everyone that invest is about to get incredibly rich. They are not going to make short sighted decisions like passing on Dylan Harper. Would they also pass on Cooper Flagg? The answer is no.

This actually gives the Spurs a competitive advantage because they can lock up all their Star players to long term deals before the start of the new CBA. The cap always goes up significantly when new deals are signed. By 2030 if Harper, Castle and Wemby are healthy and develop properly they will get extensions. The Spurs will have them signed under the current situation just in time for them to move the cap and tax levels way up. The only way the plan would fail is if the league loses its positive momentum as the top rising sport in the world.

The Spurs are bringing in new money to prepare for what comes next financially. They have to rise to the top of the league in order to have the revenue coming back to be able to pay for it all. To make a profit. You don’t reach the top by passing on top players on cheap rookie contracts. Not when you are an under .500 team. You have to keep adding positive pieces. Pieces that generate revenue.

if it fails you can always shed the salary later, The Celtics are about to do it this offseason. Would they be doing that if they repeated this year. No. They would have doubled down. Same as the Warriors did during their run.

Short-sighted decisions won’t lead to long term success. The Spurs are drafting Dylan Harper and the only way that doesn’t happen is if the Mavericks pick him #1 or the Spurs like someone better. Not because they are worried about future financial responsibility. Y’all are bored/fatigued with the off-season already and coming up with unrealistic expectations.

No one’s saying the Spurs are passing on Harper just to avoid paying people. That’s been addressed already. It’s not about being scared of money, it’s about timing and how you structure the roster around who you already believe in.

And yeah, the cap is going up. Everyone knows that. But even with a higher cap, the timing of contracts still matters. You can’t assume every player will just develop perfectly and be easy to extend. You also can’t assume someone like Harper will absolutely be worth locking up long-term without seeing him play a minute. The Spurs aren’t in the business of hoping every scenario plays out ideal. They’re in the business of control and flexibility.

The idea that you can just shed salary later sounds good on paper, but in reality teams are usually forced to make tough calls when they’re up against it. They don’t just offload players cleanly without cost. If this team ends up in that spot, it means something along the way didn’t go according to plan, and at that point you’re reacting instead of steering.

And let’s not pretend this front office hasn’t already shown its hand. They traded the 8th pick last year for a future one. That wasn’t some win-now move. It was about setting up the timing better. This conversation is just an extension of that same mindset.

[scottspurs]

The Core that didn’t make the playoffs? The core that won’t make the playoffs next year if they follow these nonsense predictions. The Front Office is not deciding on a core before rising to the top. That’s something bad franchises do. That would go against everything they have said.

[scottspurs]

The Spurs were prepared to pick a player last year at 8 until the Timberwolves called while they were on the clock. That deal was not already in place.

[Chinook]

If only the Spurs had a way of acquiring a star wing while keeping the second pick. Imagine if they could trade for an all-time shot-creating wing while still drafting Harper. It would be even better if that player were older and would be off the books before the young players were up for extensions.

[scottspurs]

2024 was a weak draft and the Spurs didn’t want 2 rookies. They didn’t just sell the pick off to the highest bidder. They received an offer that made sense. They could do the same with pick 14 this year.

[Dejounte]

The Core that didn’t make the playoffs? The core that won’t make the playoffs next year if they follow these nonsense predictions. The Front Office is not deciding on a core before rising to the top. That’s something bad franchises do. That would go against everything they have said.

No one is saying they have already made up their mind and closed the book. But you do not need a playoff run to start identifying your foundation. Wemby is clearly that. Castle just won Rookie of the Year and looked like a two-way building block all season. And Fox was not brought in as a placeholder. That trade showed they view him as a serious part of what they are building.

The core people are talking about here is Fox, Wemby, and Castle. And that trio barely played together last season. Fox arrived late in the year. Castle and Wemby both missed time. I believe they only played in eight or nine games together and the total minutes were minimal. So the idea that they have already failed together does not really hold. We have not seen them get a real chance.

This is not about avoiding talent or playing scared. It is about shaping the roster with intention and having a plan. If the front office already likes the mix of those three and sees a path to build around them with balance and flexibility, that is not short-sighted. That is smart team building.

[kxs783kms]

I agree. Don't take Harper. Trade down and actually find pieces that allow you to really start building a team. Either through the draft or trades. We don't need another ball dominate guard when we already have two really good ones. Go get us some bigs and wings.

[Dejounte]

If only the Spurs had a way of acquiring a star wing while keeping the second pick. Imagine if they could trade for an all-time shot-creating wing while still drafting Harper. It would be even better if that player were older and would be off the books before the young players were up for extensions.

The conversation here is about how the Spurs manage overlapping extensions for Fox, Castle, and Harper if they keep all three. Durant or any other veteran on a short timeline is not part of that equation. The long-term cap structure is what this thread is trying to unpack.

[scottspurs]

This entire thread feels like a Kevin O’Connor article. I’m going back to realistic conclusions. Cooper Flagg is not a good fit because the core of a non playoff team is already together? Same with Dylan Harper? This logic doesn’t check out. Bad franchises pass on great players.

[scottspurs]

This is not about avoiding talent or playing scared. It is about shaping the roster with intention and having a plan. If the front office already likes the mix of those three and sees a path to build around them with balance and flexibility, that is not short-sighted. That is smart team building.

You can draft Harper and still do that. This is likely the last time the Spurs pick this high. Have to take advantage of that opportunity.

[Chinook]

The conversation here is about how the Spurs manage overlapping extensions for Fox, Castle, and Harper if they keep all three. Durant or any other veteran on a short timeline is not part of that equation. The long-term cap structure is what this thread is trying to unpack.

I appreciate your goal, but I think not accounting for Durant as part of the long-term strategy doesn't make sense. If they trade for him, he's absolutely part of their core as much as Duncan or Manu was in their last years. The way to build for the next 10 years is to build for the next two years over and over again. It's understanding Victor is the only non-negotiable and that the team needs to remain agile enough to respond to his development. It's understanding that having to trade one or two of Fox, Castle or Harper is just life and that they'll need to be prepared to make the right trade(s) when that time comes rather than trying to make it early.

You draft Harper and trade for Durant now. In three years, maybe you break one of the guards into pieces and move another for a better fit. Then in three more years you trade more of those guys for a star or pieces depending on what the team needs.

Unless/until Fox, Castle and Wemby are on new discount deals, they aren't a unit. The Spurs would be foolish to treat them as if they were Duncan, Ginobili and Parker if they don't act like it.

[Dex]

Fox will be 28 next December, is small and has a ball-dominant game. He's very clutch and has historically been able to pour in points at times. The last year or so he was hopefully hampered by a bad hand (or else we're screwed).

That's not a max player. Probably Wembanyama is the only max player we'll ever see for this franchise in the current era. It's a completely onerous contract.

The problem with Fox is that he's not a winner on his own, he only plays one position, he's not a great playmaker, he requires a lot of shots, and is only an okay defender. Those are fine generally. If we weren't gifted Harper by the gods, things would be different. It's going to be hard to get enough touches to bring Castle and Harper into their best selves with Fox. Not yet, but eventually, and his price tag is going to become a major burden.

If the Kings wanted to max Fox, he'd still be there. They didn't, so he went hunting for a way to get his money. That's fine; it worked out for us, and probably will be fine. But to be sure the Harper pick makes things very interesting.

The silver lining is that the Spurs got Fox on a great deal. You almost have to take that trade, and sort out the pieces later.

Hard to know what was said behind closed doors about any future extension, but he's a good All-Star caliber player to help get this team back on its feet and hopefully into the playoffs now.

Assuming the Spurs take Harper (and I think they will), Dylan isn't going to step in NBA-ready on day one. He can learn and mature playing alongside and being mentored by Fox. Once the money becomes a crunch, you can decide whether Fox is a long-term piece or not.

[Raven]

I think you might be misunderstanding what I was trying to get at.

This isn’t about saying Fox is untouchable or that he’s a max-level superstar in the traditional sense. It’s about what the Spurs might be signaling through their actions. They didn’t bring him in just to be a placeholder. They did it before the draft and before knowing how the board would fall. That suggests they’re confident in his fit alongside Wemby and Castle and that they see value in what he brings over the next few years — even if he’s not a long-term max guy.

More importantly, my post was not pushing the idea that we have to keep Fox no matter what. It was actually raising the possibility that the Spurs might look to trade the number two pick — not because Harper isn’t good, but because they may already feel set with Wemby, Castle, and Fox as their core, and want to avoid stacking another player who will likely require a max deal by 2029.

That’s the whole point. It’s not just about fit today, but about how the money plays out in three or four years. You can only keep so many guys on max or near-max contracts under this new CBA, especially as a small-market team. And if they believe Castle and Wemby are ascending, and Fox gives them structure right now, they may see more value in flipping the 2 for a strong complementary piece and a lower-salaried prospect — rather than adding another high-upside player who’ll create a cap collision down the line.

The Harper hype is real, and maybe the Spurs will take him anyway and figure it out later. But I don’t think they’re just ignoring the future implications of carrying four big-money players. If anything, I think they’re planning for that now.

fox isn't really all that ball dominant.. castle is though, at least at this stage

[SpursFan86]

Few thoughts…

1a) The first question is how do the Spurs evaluate Harper? Let’s just get past this and say the obvious: if the Spurs don’t view Harper as the clear 2nd best player in the draft and a tier above Bailey/VJ/Tre/etc. then no shit they should be looking at options to trade down and still get a guy who they view is just as good + future capital/currently good players.

1b) If the above is the case, I’d say that I’m pretty hesitant about trusting this FO to know better than the clear consensus out there given the recent track record. The Wemby decision could’ve been made by a monkey and I think Castle at #4 was a fairly obvious pick as well. The 3-4 years before that have been littered with missteps. They’ll do what they’re going to do based on the evaluation but just saying as a fan the idea of it doesn’t make me very comfortable :lol

2) Moving on, let’s assume the Spurs do agree with the consensus which is that Harper is the clear cut 2nd best player in the draft. Passing up on one of the best PG prospects of the past 5 years because there might be a fit issue is extremely risky and you better receive some insane compensation for it. If Castle never develops a jumper, it’s entirely possible that he tops out as just a high level role player. Don’t want to say the unthinkable but what if something happens with Wemby’s health? When you get the chance to add a prospect of Harper’s caliber I just think you keep it simple and take the guy.

3) The “insane compensation” mentioned above has to include a current star-level player. These deals being discussed of trading back from 2 just to get a pick in the top 10 this year + 2 or 3 future FRPs are awful. I don’t care about people’s projections of the value of the picks. We watched the Spurs use 8 FRPs in 5 years and the best player that generated was…Vassell? The guy that everyone is now excited to move away from :lol Sure, everyone wants to dream of the scenario where we get someone else’s top 3 pick in 2028 when we’re already contenders, but the far more likely outcome is we get a bunch of FRPs in the 10-20 range and these picks either get moved or they turn into role players (or worse). The analogy has been used here before but it feels like we won the lottery and we’re talking about spending that money to buy more lottery tickets.

4) Lastly, this hyper focus on timelines and salaries is just premature. Of course you need to think ahead and have foresight, but talent evaluation and aggregating talent needs to be the focus. If you stack a team with talented and valuable players I tend to think you can figure the rest out. And I think it’s much easier to figure out how to trade already valuable players for a good return than it is to figure out which prospect is the best with your #16 pick you got from Joe Schmoe. In the best case scenario where Castle is legit and becomes a max-level player and Harper is the real deal as well, then great. By the time we know that Fox is coming to the end of his prime and you move him. Assuming he hasn’t totally fallen off a cliff that shouldn’t be difficult. If the FO thinks his contract will be an albatross in 2-3 years then they shouldn’t give him the extension in the first place.

Ultimately I do think Harper is the clear best prospect outside of Flagg and I highly lean towards taking him barring some ridiculous Godfather-type offer. Drafting guards with legitimate perennial all-NBA potential isn’t an opportunity that should be taken lightly, especially when we have no business even having a pick this high in the first place :lol

[exstatic]

It’s true that part of the thinking here involves looking ahead at possible financial overlap, but it’s not about fear of paying players. It’s about recognizing that if the front office already views Wemby, Castle, and Fox as their core, then locking in another potential max player just a year later might force tough decisions they’d rather avoid altogether. That’s not panicking. That’s planning.

And moves like this have worked before. Boston traded out of the number one pick in 2017, took Tatum at three, and got an extra first out of it. They had a young core in place and made a bet based on fit, not hype. That wasn’t a flashy move at the time, but it aged perfectly.

If a deal like 8, 19, Claxton, and multiple future firsts is on the table, it deserves serious thought. You get depth, flexibility, and maybe even another high-upside player in the future who fits the financial window better. And if those offers don’t materialize, sure, take Harper and figure it out later. But acting like exploring these options is front office malpractice misses the point entirely.

Harper is a big-time talent, but if the Spurs believe they already have their core and want to preserve flexibility to build around it, then moving the pick could be the smarter long-term play. It’s not overthinking. It’s just seeing the bigger picture.

1. There is no Tatum analog in this draft. Even if there were, you still have to pay him in 2029, setting up the same second apron cash crunch.

2. That second FRP turned out to be hot garbage.

3. That ‘young’ core was Jaylen Brown. Kyrie and Hayward were already on their second contracts.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

This is dumb. We need to upgrade 4-10 on the roster. You take the best talent in the draft, and sort out things later.

They all hit and you can't pay one of them, then you trade them later on.

[RedAzSa]

You certainly need to be cautious about salaries and financial flexibility in the apron era, but passing up on high end young talent for the sake of long-term cap planning seems like a bridge too far. Yes, it's critical to stay below the aprons in today's NBA, but there's no guarantee that the current structure lasts forever. Teams might hate the new restrictions and vote them out as quickly as possible. The aprons have caused a big change in team makeup and strategy, but it's also possible to overcorrect here. Drafting and paying high end talent gives you options. It's overpaying middling players and emptying your draft cupboard that can cripple your flexibility.

[Russo21]

You all have a lot of free time huh?

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

Spurs can't draft Harper bc it might hurt Fox's feelings

lmao

[Dejounte]

I appreciate your goal, but I think not accounting for Durant as part of the long-term strategy doesn't make sense. If they trade for him, he's absolutely part of their core as much as Duncan or Manu was in their last years. The way to build for the next 10 years is to build for the next two years over and over again. It's understanding Victor is the only non-negotiable and that the team needs to remain agile enough to respond to his development. It's understanding that having to trade one or two of Fox, Castle or Harper is just life and that they'll need to be prepared to make the right trade(s) when that time comes rather than trying to make it early.

You draft Harper and trade for Durant now. In three years, maybe you break one of the guards into pieces and move another for a better fit. Then in three more years you trade more of those guys for a star or pieces depending on what the team needs.

Unless/until Fox, Castle and Wemby are on new discount deals, they aren't a unit. The Spurs would be foolish to treat them as if they were Duncan, Ginobili and Parker if they don't act like it.

I agree that if the Spurs trade for Durant, he would be part of the core in the short term and could be a major piece in helping Wemby develop and lead a winning team early on. But how exactly does Durant figure into the long-term planning? He’s nearing 36 and would likely be off the roster entirely by the time Harper, Castle, and Fox are all due for extensions.

If anything, his short timeline is why he hasn’t been part of this thread’s focus. The conversation is about how the Spurs might be thinking ahead on managing three potential big extensions at once. Durant’s presence doesn’t really complicate that picture because he won’t be around when the financial crunch hits. So while he’s relevant for building a competitive team in the next couple years, I’m not seeing how he alters the long-term cap strategy.

[koriwhat]

Would yall trade #2 for a healthy, rejuvenated, focused and committed Zion? I wouldn't gamble on him currently seeing how past dictates future but when he plays he's always a stud. Yall know me, stupid shit pops into my head and well... Bueller? Bueller?

[koriwhat]

Spurs can't draft Harper bc it might hurt Fox's feelings

lmao

Nah, it'll hurt Ron Harper's feelings. :lol

[Seventyniner]

Holt says in this video the Spurs paid the luxury tax 8 times during the big 3 era and they are prepared to do so again in the future. They are bringing in new money to prepare for it.

That's the most important part to me. Consistently fielding contenders without being willing to ever pay the tax is a nonstarter.

[RC_Drunkford]

The Spurs were prepared to pick a player last year at 8 until the Timberwolves called while they were on the clock. That deal was not already in place.

and somehow you still think nobody can call them this time and make an offer that changes their mind...


If you draft a star wing at #5 or #7,you’re still going to have to pay that player in 2029, and that’s still going to push Fox out the door. It’s not just Harper at his position doing the pushing,it’s the money in this era of the second apron. Better to actually have a positional player to backfill anyway.

Take the better bet in Harper,instead of hoping some prospective wing prospect pops and hits his 99% outcome.

depends on who you draft. I think an Essengue could become an All-Star, but he's only 18 and won't be an All-Star when he's 21.

[Chinook]

I agree that if the Spurs trade for Durant, he would be part of the core in the short term and could be a major piece in helping Wemby develop and lead a winning team early on. But how exactly does Durant figure into the long-term planning? He’s nearing 36 and would likely be off the roster entirely by the time Harper, Castle, and Fox are all due for extensions.

If anything, his short timeline is why he hasn’t been part of this thread’s focus. The conversation is about how the Spurs might be thinking ahead on managing three potential big extensions at once. Durant’s presence doesn’t really complicate that picture because he won’t be around when the financial crunch hits. So while he’s relevant for building a competitive team in the next couple years, I’m not seeing how he alters the long-term cap strategy.

Because my point is that guys like Durant aren't aberrations. Yes, Durant himself is superlative due to talent, but the need to be able to add the Durants of the world will never go away. The team shouldn't build around the idea that they'll have the same star trio for many years. Maybe in three years, both Castle and Fox are gone, and the Spurs' core is Wemby, Harper and Siakam. Then four years later, and it's Wemby, Tatum and some new PG and wing phenoms they drafted in 2030 and 2031.

That's how you build for long-term success, by being flexible rather than rigidly selecting a core and making more and more compromises as that core becomes more expensive. Durant would just be the first step in that process, but he'd set the standard for future iterations. The Spurs should never turn away from building through the draft, but their money should be going toward what the players who currently have the production rather than players you hope will have the production in five years.

[RC_Drunkford]

I appreciate your goal, but I think not accounting for Durant as part of the long-term strategy doesn't make sense. If they trade for him, he's absolutely part of their core as much as Duncan or Manu was in their last years. The way to build for the next 10 years is to build for the next two years over and over again. It's understanding Victor is the only non-negotiable and that the team needs to remain agile enough to respond to his development. It's understanding that having to trade one or two of Fox, Castle or Harper is just life and that they'll need to be prepared to make the right trade(s) when that time comes rather than trying to make it early.

You draft Harper and trade for Durant now. In three years, maybe you break one of the guards into pieces and move another for a better fit. Then in three more years you trade more of those guys for a star or pieces depending on what the team needs.

Unless/until Fox, Castle and Wemby are on new discount deals, they aren't a unit. The Spurs would be foolish to treat them as if they were Duncan, Ginobili and Parker if they don't act like it.

I can make the same argument for the other path:

The Spurs will never have that much leverage again. This is the first offseason where half the league will be on the move, including superstars. Teams will try to avoid apron penalties, offload contracts, etc. Tanking teams are desperately trying to get a franchise player, because the lottery odds are evened out and there's no guarantee they will land in the top 4.

With the Spurs having the #2 pick and a supposed franchise altering PG on the table, they can use that leverage to start a bidding war right now, so they can squeeze a large amount of future assets and players out of teams. Instead of waiting for 4 years and shopping Harper around as a sixth man with a questionable jumphsot, they should sell high.

[Dex]

Would yall trade #2 for a healthy, rejuvenated, focused and committed Zion? I wouldn't gamble on him currently seeing how past dictates future but when he plays he's always a stud. Yall know me, stupid shit pops into my head and well... Bueller? Bueller?

:lmao now you just straight up trolling.

[koriwhat]

:lmao now you just straight up trolling.

:lol

Man I remember when he was in college and thinking he'd be a stud in the NBA. He would be but he's injured too often and besides that, the worst thing of all, he's a lazy fuck who puts up crazy numbers when he does play only to gaslight the Pelicans into more "hope" from Zion and "who he could become". That franchise is doomed!

[Dejounte]

It gets mentioned on here all the time how people envy the position OKC is in with their stockpile of future picks and flexibility. The idea of building a long runway, being able to pivot, and having multiple paths to success is always praised when it is someone else doing it.

Now that there is a realistic chance for the Spurs to do something similar by turning one high-value pick into multiple picks, a proven starter like Claxton, and future flexibility, suddenly it is seen as some kind of overthinking or mistake. This might be the only real opportunity the Spurs have in the near future to load up on future assets like that without blowing up the roster.

It is strange to celebrate what OKC has done while being completely against the Spurs doing the one thing that could actually get them closer to that position.

[LeBowen]

It gets mentioned on here all the time how people envy the position OKC is in with their stockpile of future picks and flexibility. The idea of building a long runway, being able to pivot, and having multiple paths to success is always praised when it is someone else doing it.

Now that there is a realistic chance for the Spurs to do something similar by turning one high-value pick into multiple picks, a proven starter like Claxton, and future flexibility, suddenly it is seen as some kind of overthinking or mistake. This might be the only real opportunity the Spurs have in the near future to load up on future assets like that without blowing up the roster.

It is strange to celebrate what OKC has done while being completely against the Spurs doing the one thing that could actually get them closer to that position.

Because there's a certain value threshold that shouldn't be crossed.
We traded away #8, which was fine. We can also trade #14, would also be fine. We can for example give Hawks their pick or swap back in exchange for multiple assets, would also be fine.

But you don't trade away #2 when such a good prospect is available just to stock up on more picks.
If we had #3 or if Harper wasn't in this class and our choices were VJ, Ace or Johnson, then fine.
Harper is too good of a prospect not to pick.

[SpursFan86]

It gets mentioned on here all the time how people envy the position OKC is in with their stockpile of future picks and flexibility. The idea of building a long runway, being able to pivot, and having multiple paths to success is always praised when it is someone else doing it.

Now that there is a realistic chance for the Spurs to do something similar by turning one high-value pick into multiple picks, a proven starter like Claxton, and future flexibility, suddenly it is seen as some kind of overthinking or mistake. This might be the only real opportunity the Spurs have in the near future to load up on future assets like that without blowing up the roster.

It is strange to celebrate what OKC has done while being completely against the Spurs doing the one thing that could actually get them closer to that position.

When has OKC traded out of a top 3 pick who was almost universally considered an all-NBA caliber prospect…?

OKC is in the position they’re in right now largely in part to absolutely robbing the Clippers and getting a massive haul for Paul George which included SGA and several picks.

No one would be envying OKC if they didn’t have SGA and traded away Chet for more future FRPs :lol

[Ice009]

Would yall trade #2 for a healthy, rejuvenated, focused and committed Zion? I wouldn't gamble on him currently seeing how past dictates future but when he plays he's always a stud. Yall know me, stupid shit pops into my head and well... Bueller? Bueller?

The thing is, if he were in that kind of shape and mindset, he wouldn't be on the trade block. I think he's too into his women/side pieces as distractions, eating and stuff other than Basketball. Maybe he turns it around, but IMO, if he's on the block, he's on the block for a reason and NO would probably be happy to trade him for a haul if they can get one.

[koriwhat]

The thing is, if he were in that kind of shape and mindset, he wouldn't be on the trade block. I think he's too into his women/side pieces as distractions, eating and stuff other than Basketball. Maybe he turns it around, but IMO, if he's on the block, he's on the block for a reason and NO would probably be happy to trade him for a haul if they can get one.

It's a pity, right, especially with his skillset coming out of college. I guess the saying is true, "Hard work beats talent."

[Atl Spur]

When has OKC traded out of a top 3 pick who was almost universally considered an all-NBA caliber prospect…?

OKC is in the position they’re in right now largely in part to absolutely robbing the Clippers and getting a massive haul for Paul George which included SGA and several picks.

No one would be envying OKC if they didn’t have SGA and traded away Chet for more future FRPs :lol

Bravo! Great post!!

[Ice009]

It's a pity, right, especially with his skillset coming out of college. I guess the saying is true, "Hard work beats talent."

Just like you mentioned, I really thought he was going to be a monster coming out of college. The main thing I was worried about was the weight on his knees/frame with the power he had, but turns out, that weight wasn't that big of a deal compared to some of the numbers he's gotten to on the scale the past couple of years. I also didn't expect any of the other stuff either. Really is a shame that he's pissing it away. I don't even like to think about it or him at all because I'd kill for half his talent and athleticism.

[koriwhat]

I don't even like to think about it or him at all because I'd kill for half his talent and athleticism.

Any one of us would. It sucks to watch such a talent who would take it for granted. Oh what could have been...

[spurraider21]

I think that's a horrible idea and is counting their chickens before they hatch. If Castle never gets a good jumpshot then he's going to be more a role player in the mold of Jason Hart than say a star in the mold of Jalen Brunson. Passing on Harper is lunacy, especially when Steph is still an unknown. You can kick the can of having to pick which two to pay between Fox, Castle, and Harper down the road four years when you have a much clearer idea what you have and you can easily pay all three of them plus Wemby until then.
yep. there isnt really a scenario where you move 2 just because you dont want to be "stuck with harper"

what if Fox gets hurt. what if Castle's value has already peaked and he never becomes particularly efficient. then you absolutely want to have Harper there as another long term option with a high end oulook. what if castle ends up improving his shot and settles in as the 3. suddenly that logjam isnt there.

the "worst case" scenario of taking harper is that all of fox/castle/harper end up being good but you cant get full value out of each or any of them. in which case you can always just make the trade then. its not about min-maxing our immediate roster needs for the 24-25 season. you cant make a choice about the #2 overall selection purely for the upcoming season's immediate needs and fits

[Chinook]

I can make the same argument for the other path:

The Spurs will never have that much leverage again. This is the first offseason where half the league will be on the move, including superstars. Teams will try to avoid apron penalties, offload contracts, etc. Tanking teams are desperately trying to get a franchise player, because the lottery odds are evened out and there's no guarantee they will land in the top 4.

With the Spurs having the #2 pick and a supposed franchise altering PG on the table, they can use that leverage to start a bidding war right now, so they can squeeze a large amount of future assets and players out of teams. Instead of waiting for 4 years and shopping Harper around as a sixth man with a questionable jumphsot, they should sell high.

This is an argument we've been worrying about a lot recently: "What if Harper doesn't develop", and it applies to Castle and every future pick. The answer is the same: You trust the process and hope it doesn't happen, but if it does, you pivot. That's much easier to do when you aren't locking yourself into a single idea of what the team's "core" is going to be.

Also, folks like Castle and Harper becoming good rotation players but not stars is only a tragedy if you don't pay them accordingly. You don't max out a Harper who's not able to unseat Fox or Castle, but a) if he's a threat to get big offer sheets, he has trade value and b) that means the Spurs got years of quality sixth-man play for cheap, which given these are the Durant years we're talking about is really valuable. Often in these arguments of players having lesser value if traded later it gets lost that value is ultimately there to be used, not exchanged. Guys having less trade value after contributing to a winning team for years is completely fine. They aren't trying to get top dollar on every deal. They're trying to win games and rings.

[spurraider21]

Would yall trade #2 for a healthy, rejuvenated, focused and committed Zion? I wouldn't gamble on him currently seeing how past dictates future but when he plays he's always a stud. Yall know me, stupid shit pops into my head and well... Bueller? Bueller?
offensively, a healthy zion is not that far off from Giannis. they play a mostly similar brand on that side. ball handling, face up, finishing with power and athleticism. giannis is just longer so he does it better. neither can shoot well, both are solid playmakers.

so many of the same "how can defenses possibly deal with a wemby/giannis pairing" thoughts would also apply to zion

but giannis also provides all-world defense whereas Zion... doesnt. and zion is somehow a meh rebounder despite his abilities. and then you bake in his injury history, and his apparent lack of real commitment to the game, and its not worth the #2 pick

[KobesAchilles]

What the Spurs think currently has no bearing on 4 years from now.

[baseline bum]

these are the accurate extension numbers of Wemby, Fox, Castle, Harper with the salary cap and luxury tax lines. 29/30 is obviously the critical year. This would work in theory, if you are willing to trade away Fox in 2029 which would be the plan for most people on this board, I assume.

https://i.ibb.co/yn1w4mRt/Spurs-Harper-extension.jpg

The plan would be to trade one of Fox / Castle / Harper in the summer of 2029.

[baseline bum]

This is dumb. We need to upgrade 4-10 on the roster. You take the best talent in the draft, and sort out things later.

They all hit and you can't pay one of them, then you trade them later on.

Yeah how stupid would it have been if Jerry West thought shit I already have Eddie Jones, Nick Van Exel, and Cedric Ceballos, what do I need to draft Kobe Bryant for?

[scottspurs]

and somehow you still think nobody can call them this time and make an offer that changes their mind...



depends on who you draft. I think an Essengue could become an All-Star, but he's only 18 and won't be an All-Star when he's 21.

Not with news of Dylan Harper visiting the Spurs for multiple days this week

[John B]

Yeah how stupid would it have been if Jerry West thought shit I already have Eddie Jones, Nick Van Exel, and Cedric Ceballos, what do I need to draft Kobe Bryant for?


Agree. Just because you have Fox and Castle, it doesn’t mean you pass up on consensus #2 pick (and arguably as much or even more Alpha Dog than Flagg). The Spurs have always done good with their players (even if Uncle Dennis didn’t think so). They open a dialogue what will happen come contract time, and if it’s not agreeable , then they’ll find that player a better situation. It’s assuming too much that these players are only about the money. Kobe himself expressed jealousy for Tim Duncan to have played in one NBA team, and how it would’ve been ideal to play in such a stable organization. The Big 3 have always expressed their appreciation for having team continuity which allowed them to contend every year. It’s just silly to presume these players will not sign if not for max contract. Brunson showed it’s not all about the money. Have a little faith on people.

[John B]

Not with news of Dylan Harper visiting the Spurs for multiple days this week

I think they’ll run that multiple guards and tweak what else they’d need in the draft and agency. But I have no doubt it would be Dylan to Spurs at #2

[Ariel]

Yeah how stupid would it have been if Jerry West thought shit I already have Eddie Jones, Nick Van Exel, and Cedric Ceballos, what do I need to draft Kobe Bryant for?
You don't have to go all the way back to Portland passing on MJ on account of having Drexler, the arguably most important player in these playoffs (Tyrese Haliburton) was moved by his former team (Sacramento) because they already had Fox and weren't willing to wait and collect more data, they rushed it and not only did they move the better of the 2, but also the one they kept (Fox) asked out, they got pennies on the dollar for him, and neither Fox nor Haliburton are on their roster and thy find themselves hoping they can land someone anywhere near as good as them. So yeah, trading a player you think is the best talent available because you (circumstantially) already have that spot covered (which may not even be the case) doesn't sound like a wise strategy.

[koriwhat]

offensively, a healthy zion is not that far off from Giannis. they play a mostly similar brand on that side. ball handling, face up, finishing with power and athleticism. giannis is just longer so he does it better. neither can shoot well, both are solid playmakers.

so many of the same "how can defenses possibly deal with a wemby/giannis pairing" thoughts would also apply to zion

but giannis also provides all-world defense whereas Zion... doesnt. and zion is somehow a meh rebounder despite his abilities. and then you bake in his injury history, and his apparent lack of real commitment to the game, and its not worth the #2 pick

I hear you clearly SR. Glad to have you in on this convo, bud. :tu

If Zion, and that's a huge if, was focused, healthy, and willing to put 110% in, you'd see defense unlike you've ever seen. I remember watching the small amount of college games he was in and that dude was great on both ends. Some people just get too content when they always have signed on the dotted line and know no matter what that $ is guaranteed. I don't see that dog in him whatsoever these days and it's truly sad.

If Zion's trajectory was what it was speculated to be, I don't even think we'd be entraining any Giannis discussions and only Zion discussions. I like Giannis but I clearly don't remember him being anything close to Zion on the court in his first yr or so. The only thing Giannis had, early on in his career compared to Zion, was not being injured.

It is what it is though, Zion is a bust even though he averages 24ppg. When you can muster up more than 20-40 games a season, no matter your production on court, you're a bust in the NBA. SMH...

[LeBowen]

Tyrese Haliburton

One could say that Spurs passed on him because Derrick and Dejounte were on the roster.

And I don't think Fox/Haliburton situation was that bad for the Kings, it's just that they failed to build around Fox later on and then he asked out.
If we get Harper and it becomes a similar situation, we could get a lot for him or Castle later on. Fox won't ever be a negative asset and we didn't pay much for him, that outcome is also fine.

[John B]

A lot of NBA would be jealous of TP and Manu’s long career of having to play with Timmy, and every year contending. The Spurs have the opportunity of duplicating that success. They have the blue print of a steady organization, a young consummate player on Wemby with all the advantages of skills and physique, Fox, Castle and now Harper. If you have an opportunity to contend every year, and plant your family in one city, your kids not having to move schools. This perception of jumping off from a championship team because of not maxing out on the money? I think many players would prefer the former, staying with a contender, play and hopefully his jersey retired by the same team. It would depend on the organization doing what is right, and the Spurs have been the model of excellence.

The Spurs will draft Harper at #2 for themselves. I won’t even trade for 30 yrs old Giannis let alone Trey Murphy III.

[RC_Drunkford]

This is an argument we've been worrying about a lot recently: "What if Harper doesn't develop", and it applies to Castle and every future pick. The answer is the same: You trust the process and hope it doesn't happen, but if it does, you pivot. That's much easier to do when you aren't locking yourself into a single idea of what the team's "core" is going to be.

Also, folks like Castle and Harper becoming good rotation players but not stars is only a tragedy if you don't pay them accordingly. You don't max out a Harper who's not able to unseat Fox or Castle, but a) if he's a threat to get big offer sheets, he has trade value and b) that means the Spurs got years of quality sixth-man play for cheap, which given these are the Durant years we're talking about is really valuable. Often in these arguments of players having lesser value if traded later it gets lost that value is ultimately there to be used, not exchanged. Guys having less trade value after contributing to a winning team for years is completely fine. They aren't trying to get top dollar on every deal. They're trying to win games and rings.

fair point


The plan would be to trade one of Fox / Castle / Harper in the summer of 2029.

well that's what I said too (most likely Fox)

[TD 21]

I'm not advocating trading Harper, but I don't buy that he's going to accept waiting up to 4 years to be handed "his own team" and given that they can't offer him the opportunity to show he's worthy of that or a roster that fits around him, he's more than likely going to depreciate in value between now and whenever it is a decision is made on Fox or him.

[LeBowen]

I'm not advocating trading Harper, but I don't buy that he's going to accept waiting up to 4 years to be handed "his own team" and given that they can't offer him the opportunity to show he's worthy of that or a roster that fits around him, he's more than likely going to depreciate in value between now and whenever it is a decision is made on Fox or him.

What a horrible take.
Why would he wait for 4 years?
And why would he even have his own team? This is Wemby's team even if we had Luka or SGA.

Harper will get 30mpg, if not more, in his rookie year.
More than enough minutes to show his worth.
If he's indeed the second coming of Harden, he'll find himself in the starting lineup in no time.

If he's smart he'll quickly realize playing with Wemby is the best possible situation for him.
No need to look further than his father who wasted his prime on garbage rosters before he got to play with MJ.

[Mr. Body]

The premise of the thread is weird to me.

Of course the Spurs is betting that Fox/Wemby/Castle are the core, although I'd replace Harper there and they'll keep Fox as long as they can or if needed.

Harper truly has the capability of carrying a huge offensive load as a guard. Not saying he's an alpha or a dick personality or whatever, but that his skill and talent could project as a franchise player. He's very possibly going to be great alongside Wembanyama or, if something bad happens to our beanpole, lead the team himself. It's going to work out great.

[RC_Drunkford]

What a horrible take.
Why would he wait for 4 years?
And why would he even have his own team? This is Wemby's team even if we had Luka or SGA.

Harper will get 30mpg, if not more, in his rookie year.
More than enough minutes to show his worth.
If he's indeed the second coming of Harden, he'll find himself in the starting lineup in no time.

If he's smart he'll quickly realize playing with Wemby is the best possible situation for him.
No need to look further than his father who wasted his prime on garbage rosters before he got to play with MJ.

Harden was the 6th man for his 3 first NBA seasons on a team that eventually made the NBA finals. That should actually be your main argument for drafting Harper.

Also starting out in an offball 3-point shooting role and then being the ball handler against benches is a pretty good development path for a lead guard. Where you don't give him too much responsibility at the beginning and can ramp that up every year.

There are valid arguments for both cases, which makes this a fun discussion.

[LeBowen]

Harden was the 6th man for his 3 first NBA seasons on a team that eventually made the NBA finals.

Harden had a slow start, Harper will surely get a bigger role than what Harden had in his first two seasons.


Also starting out in an offball 3-point shooting role and then being the ball handler against benches is a pretty good development path for a lead guard. Where you don't give him too much responsibility at the beginning and can ramp that up in every year.

There are valid arguments for both cases.

My opinion is that Castle isn't a natural point guard and that there won't be that much overlap with Harper if we're talking their roles as long as both develop their 3pt shot.

Basketball has also changed a lot from Harden's early years, guards who can't self-create aren't going to be a thing in a few years.
OKC was starting Sefolosha/Jeff Green/KD next to Westbrook in those years, no chance that would happen in today's game.

[Chinook]

Do we even know if Harper cares about being a PG? It's not like with the NFL where being a QB is massively different than any other position in terms if earnings or accolades. Harper may develop into a play-making wing rather than a PG and be completely fine with it. Right now, his lack of off-ball experience is hurting his stock more than any other area. Taking a couple of years working on it just makes him a more complete player than he'd be if he was the man on a bad team like Utah or Brooklyn. He'll likely never have to deal with black-hole or hero-ball stigmas because he'll get to come up on a team that let him grow the rest of his game.

I like him as the starting two-guard from opening night.

[Chinook]

Do we even know if Harper cares about being a PG? It's not like with the NFL where being a QB is massively different than any other position in terms if earnings or accolades. Harper may develop into a play-making wing rather than a PG and be completely fine with it. Right now, his lack of off-ball experience is hurting his stock more than any other area. Taking a couple of years working on it just makes him a more complete player than he'd be if he was the man on a bad team like Utah or Brooklyn. He'll likely never have to deal with black-hole or hero-ball stigmas because he'll get to come up on a team that let him grow the rest of his game.

I like him as the starting two-guard from opening night.

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

2 guards 2 wings 1 big

length at guards/wings desireable

[Degoat]

Draft Harper and I believe the spurs are 1 PF/C away from being a quality playoff team

[SpursBills]

Call me superstitious or whatever, but I'd just hate for this to be potentially the THIRD time that a guard that gets passed over because of fit with De'aaron Fox ends up turning into an all-NBA guy (Luka, Haliburton)

PS lol kings

[Frenchfred]

Does anybody else have the feeling that Wemby will actually take less than the max to make sure that the team can keep everybody?

[Ice009]

Does anybody else have the feeling that Wemby will actually take less than the max to make sure that the team can keep everybody?

I have a feeling he might as he is that type of person. If he really likes his teammates and wants to keep the team together, I think he might.

[John B]

I have a feeling he might as he is that type of person. If he really likes his teammates and wants to keep the team together, I think he might.

Agree. He’s the Timmy of this young group. He needs to set the example, being coachable and also that it’s not all about the money.

[CGD]

Does anybody else have the feeling that Wemby will actually take less than the max to make sure that the team can keep everybody?

It doesn’t hurt that he’ll be crushing it in the endorsement game.

[Atl Spur]

Does anybody else have the feeling that Wemby will actually take less than the max to make sure that the team can keep everybody?

I think so; he’ll set the example hopefully.

[KobesAchilles]

3 years ago we had to accept that Sochan, KJ, and Vassell were our “core.” Then the next year we got Wemby. And now none of these losers are our “core.”

We don’t have to accept anything right now. We literally have zero information on Harper. We don’t have to accept anything. If Harper is better than Castle will the front office “bet” on Castle? If Harper is a better version of Fox do you think the Front Office will still “bet” on Fox?

If they were really “betting” on Fox, Wemby, and Castle as our core going forward then they wouldn’t even draft Harper. They’d draft Ace. And they would’ve hired a real coach. And get actual assistants. Instead they are really hedging their bets and drafting Harper and signing a dude that is going to be fired in 3 years time.

[scott]

Thank you KobesAchilles… a player is only a part of the “core” until someone better comes along. The thing is, that players better than Wemby don’t come along… players better than Vassell do. That’s the driving force behind a member of the “core” being “untouchable”

[tbdog]

Harper isn't going to be good like castle in his rookie year. What I mean is, dependable in big games, playoffs or play-in. He'll be good for a rookie.

[KobesAchilles]

Harper isn't going to be good like castle in his rookie year. What I mean is, dependable in big games, playoffs or play-in. He'll be good for a rookie.
Castle has played zero big games, zero play-in games, and zero playoff games just like Harper so how would you know?

[Dejounte]

Thank you KobesAchilles (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=50221)… a player is only a part of the “core” until someone better comes along. The thing is, that players better than Wemby don’t come along… players better than Vassell do. That’s the driving force behind a member of the “core” being “untouchable”

I’ll respond to you directly instead of the guy you’re quoting. Never enjoyed engaging with him since all he cares about is throwing personal insults.

That said, I think it’s off to say the Spurs were building around Vassell, Keldon, or Sochan. The last real core they tried to build around was Kawhi and Aldridge. Once that ended, they shifted gears completely. They started tearing things down, collecting assets, and positioning themselves for the draft.

They were not building around those guys. They were waiting for someone like Wemby to come along. And now, for the first time since that era, it feels like they might actually believe they have more than one real core piece on the roster. Wemby is obviously the centerpiece, but Fox and Castle might be the first players they truly feel comfortable building around for the long term.

That is the entire premise of this thread. It is a hypothetical based on the idea that the front office believes it has finally found its core. Not just the top two or three players from any random year, but a real foundation to move forward with.

[Ariel]

offensively, a healthy zion is not that far off from Giannis. they play a mostly similar brand on that side. ball handling, face up, finishing with power and athleticism. giannis is just longer so he does it better. neither can shoot well, both are solid playmakers.

so many of the same "how can defenses possibly deal with a wemby/giannis pairing" thoughts would also apply to zion

but giannis also provides all-world defense whereas Zion... doesnt. and zion is somehow a meh rebounder despite his abilities. and then you bake in his injury history, and his apparent lack of real commitment to the game, and its not worth the #2 pick
Any argument predicated upon Zion being healthy has the same practical consequences as anything predicated on pigs flying (I bet they could give hawks a nice run for their money)

[R. DeMurre]

One could say that Spurs passed on him because Derrick and Dejounte were on the roster.



I've never understood this justification. It's not like Vassell is significantly taller than Haliburton (if at all), and he wasn't a better 3pt shooter, 2pt shooter, or free throw shooter. It's easy to argue that Haliburton was a better on ball and a better off ball prospect. Maybe there was a perception that Devin was a better defender at the time, but otherwise Haliburton seemed to have every other advantage, and could've been slotted in as a SG just as easily as Vassell was. It was a huge miss at the time that resulted in Wemby through sheer luck, but it seems to go against everything the Spurs now preach in terms of wanting multiple ball handlers, maximum versatility, and a "positionless" scheme.

[kxs783kms]

Thinking a generational talent will to take a pay cut??? LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. The stuff people say in this forum lol.

[tbdog]

Castle has played zero big games, zero play-in games, and zero playoff games just like Harper so how would you know?

There is not many rookie guards that come in as a rookie and are a plus, that's why?

[skin27]

Draft Harper and I believe the spurs are 1 PF/C away from being a quality playoff team
Why are you still here? Defrozen/Derozan is not on spurs uniform anymore.

[skin27]

Agree. He’s the Timmy of this young group. He needs to set the example, being coachable and also that it’s not all about the money.

not in his first 2 max contract. He needs the money in his 20’s and early 30’s.

[skin27]

Thinking a generational talent will to take a pay cut??? LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. The stuff people say in this forum lol.

This. Actually spurs organization can brainwash him to do that.

[Mal]

Spurs should closely monitor, how OKC will handle their issue with extending players. If OKC take paycut, to stick together, that may be new meta.

And by paycut, I mean taking 47mil per year, rather than 52m in case for SGA.

[RC_Drunkford]

Does anybody else have the feeling that Wemby will actually take less than the max to make sure that the team can keep everybody?

I think if they won a chip or are close to it he might. They might even do it as a group if they stay together, where everybody takes a slight discount to keep the band together. The same thing might go for OKC though.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Wemby taking a paycut is crazy talk. He won’t and he shouldn’t. The Tim Duncan example is completely wrong as Timmy got every dollar available to him for his first 14-15 seasons. He was even making over the max for a few seasons due to contract increases.

The only chance for the Spurs to get some sort of flexibility would be if the CBA is updated and the cap hit for max players drafted by the same team is reduced, say if you’ve drafted a guy and he qualifies for the Rose max he’d still get it but the cap hit would that of a regular max. There’s some logic in this but it doesn’t seem likely to actually happen.

[KobesAchilles]

There is not many rookie guards that come in as a rookie and are a plus, that's why?
That’s true. Not everyone is TP. That being said speed and athleticism always transfer in the playoffs. It’s his shooting that will make or break him in the playoffs. The same with Castle. The same with the whole team. I think Harper will contribute greatly if we make the playoffs bc I expect some of our guys to be tight and not Harper. Dude has a confidence that i haven’t seen from a young guard prospect in years.

[LeBowen]

That’s true. Not everyone is TP. That being said speed and athleticism always transfer in the playoffs. It’s his shooting that will make or break him in the playoffs. The same with Castle. The same with the whole team. I think Harper will contribute greatly if we make the playoffs bc I expect some of our guys to be tight and not Harper. Dude has a confidence that i haven’t seen from a young guard prospect in years.

Shooting will make or break him and Castle if we're talking star potential, but we just saw a team win a finals game on the road without being a threat from 3pt.
If Harper's paint penetration translates and Castle tightens up his handle, Spurs will be a nightmare to deal with because it's obvious Wemby will always be more focused on the perimeter than traditional big man game.

[KobesAchilles]

I’ll respond to you directly instead of the guy you’re quoting. Never enjoyed engaging with him since all he cares about is throwing personal insults.

That said, I think it’s off to say the Spurs were building around Vassell, Keldon, or Sochan. The last real core they tried to build around was Kawhi and Aldridge. Once that ended, they shifted gears completely. They started tearing things down, collecting assets, and positioning themselves for the draft.

They were not building around those guys. They were waiting for someone like Wemby to come along. And now, for the first time since that era, it feels like they might actually believe they have more than one real core piece on the roster. Wemby is obviously the centerpiece, but Fox and Castle might be the first players they truly feel comfortable building around for the long term.

That is the entire premise of this thread. It is a hypothetical based on the idea that the front office believes it has finally found its core. Not just the top two or three players from any random year, but a real foundation to move forward with.
Yes all I care about is insulting people. I’m known for starting threads about specific posters so I can insult them on a personal level. I’m also known for cussing them out here in multiple other threads… oh wait that isn’t me. That’s somebody else instead.

Whether they were building off of them or not is semantics. I guarantee that they thought Sochan would be a part of the “core” going forward. I’m sure they thought they found their new 3D guy for years to come in Vassell. The point is that the Spurs have made a lot of incorrect assumptions about their team and organization. Only for them to be proven wrong over and over again and again.

You don’t get the #2 pick in the draft and use it on the most talented guard prospect since Ja and not have him as part of your “core” going forward. Nobody in the organization thought that we would even get the number two pick to begin with. They thought their core (pre-Fox) was good enough to make the playoffs. I was the only one to correctly say that we would get a top 4 pick this year before the season even started. Everyone thought the same as the FO that we were too good to get a top 4 pick. Whelp.

We have zero information about Harper. We’ve never seen him play. Never seen him learn our offense. Never seen how he picks up our defense. Never seen him work on an outside shot for 4 consecutive years. We have nothing on him. So the Spurs right now thinking that Fox and Castle are our core guys doesn’t mean much. They think Mitch is our actual coach going forward. The truth is that the Spurs don’t believe that bc if they did then they would be making championship moves. A generational big, all star guard, and a rising all star level guard is enough to compete for a championship nowadays. Heck Indy has less than that and are in the finals.

People here are saying that this isn’t a championship team. But that’s bc we aren’t acting like one. That “core” of Fox, Wemby, and Castle should get us home court next season. They won’t and that’s bc the organization is hedging their bets. They refuse to surround them with modern NBA players. Instead we will have zero defense chuckers like KJ and Vassell. No offense Sochan. No really back up big man. No real backup PG and no real wing 3&D players. If the Spurs really believed in this core then they would do more to support it.

[SpursFan86]

I think you can be a star guard without developing a great jumper as long as you’re elite at getting to the FT line (which both Castle and Harper have the potential of doing). If you’re a guard who can consistently penetrate and break down defenses, make plays for others, and finish in the paint at a high level while also getting to the line 8-10 times a game…definitely think that player can be a star, especially if they’re a high level defender. Jimmy Butler might be the best example of this if we exclude hyper-athletic guys.

That being said, in the context of Harper/Castle playing together long term I do think at least one of them will probably need to develop a solid jumper. If both of them are sub-35% shooters from deep I think it’ll make things pretty challenging. In that case the most likely outcome is one of them takes over a 6th man type role and you likely end up staggering their minutes a fair amount.

[LeBowen]

Nobody in the organization thought that we would even get the number two pick to begin with. They thought their core (pre-Fox) was good enough to make the playoffs. I was the only one to correctly say that we would get a top 4 pick this year before the season even started. Everyone thought the same as the FO that we were too good to get a top 4 pick. Whelp.


Agreed with most of the stuff, but not this one. We were on track for around .500 record before Wemby got hurt and we would've surely been in the play-in.
We got a top4 pick because of Wemby's injury and some more ridiculous lottery luck.


No real backup PG

Harper will solve that issue.


no real wing 3&D players.

I'd say Champagnie was showing some good stuff after Jeremy got injured, but then he lost his spot and a lot of minutes because we had to develop our Rodman cosplayer and Vassell also returned.

[Ice009]

Agreed with most of the stuff, but not this one. We were on track for around .500 record before Wemby got hurt and we would've surely been in the play-in.
We got a top4 pick because of Wemby's injury and some more ridiculous lottery luck.



Harper will solve that issue.



I'd say Champagnie was showing some good stuff after Jeremy got injured, but then he lost his spot and a lot of minutes because we had to develop our Rodman cosplayer and Vassell also returned.

Same as Dallas really. Both the Dallas and Spurs shouldn't have gotten the 1st and 2nd pick. You really can't fuck that amazing luck up, and you need to take Cooper and Dylan if you're both teams. You don't pass up that incredible luck up.
It sucks that Dallas will get Cooper as I freaking really like him, and I think I am going to watch some regular season Dallas games for the first time ever.

[Frenchfred]

Thinking a generational talent will to take a pay cut??? LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. The stuff people say in this forum lol.

Duncan took an 11.5 million pay cut in 2012 and 5 millions in 2015. Duncan was not a generational talent? Who were the superstar deserving of a max contract playing with Duncan in his first years?

[Gagnrath]

That's why it's essential that the Spurs don't give out max extensions just going through the motions. What it means to be a max player has changed now that teams basically can't have three of them on a team at the same time. If the Spurs don't think Fox can be a top-two player on a title team, they shouldn't give him a max. Let him go into the season without an extension and see if his play warrants it. If Castle only wants to extend on a rookie max, then go into the next off-season and let someone offer him a contract. If Wemby has another injury scare next year, don't write in Rose-max language into his extension.

If the guys end up signing for like $8-15 Million less per year than the maxes, all of the sudden it becomes much easier to fit in the role-players and/or keep three of the stars. As I've said before, Castle may well develop into a very good player who can be that third guy on a contender and still only sign a $200M/5 because third-guys aren't max-guys and with RFA matching rights, teams might not be willing to negotiate for the Spurs. I think folks too often think of the lotto guys as either pass or fail rather than them becoming vets with a certain market value as they develop.

Anyway, the Spurs should be aiming to remain flexible. That means keeping as many of their picks as possible so they can continuously have fresh blood on their bench. That's even more true during the four "double years" the team has coming up. It also means being wiling to trade away some of their guys, both to "break them into smaller parts" and gain more assets and cheaper role-players and to find win-now players who might boost the team for a couple of years rather than be part of the long-term rebuild. Unless the team lucks into a trio of guys who are willing to make the money work to stay together throughout their careers, the front office is not going to be able to put a group together and just coast for a decade. Even if they do find that kind of trio, they'll need to be even more diligent in maintaining young and cheap players around them. They can't be like the old Spurs and piss away draft picks constantly because they had the same group of 5-8 guys for years at a time.

Honestly the 2 pick coming now is good. That gives you a need to trade one of castle, fox harper. 27 or 28 time frame getting picks in return since your own should be end of first round. Farm and repeat till your franchise player declines.

[RC_Drunkford]

Shooting will make or break him and Castle if we're talking star potential, but we just saw a team win a finals game on the road without being a threat from 3pt.
If Harper's paint penetration translates and Castle tightens up his handle, Spurs will be a nightmare to deal with because it's obvious Wemby will always be more focused on the perimeter than traditional big man game.

that makes fixing the back up C spot even more important. We really need somebody who flurishes in pick & rolls.


Does anybody else have the feeling that Wemby will actually take less than the max to make sure that the team can keep everybody?

A good start would be Fox taking a small discount and the Spurs frontloading the contract, so there's less of a cap crunch in 2029 when Harper's extension is kicking in.



People here are saying that this isn’t a championship team. But that’s bc we aren’t acting like one. That “core” of Fox, Wemby, and Castle should get us home court next season. They won’t and that’s bc the organization is hedging their bets. They refuse to surround them with modern NBA players. Instead we will have zero defense chuckers like KJ and Vassell. No offense Sochan. No really back up big man. No real backup PG and no real wing 3&D players. If the Spurs really believed in this core then they would do more to support it.

Absolutely agree with this point. Spurs need to stop fucking around and create a roster that can actually play modern basketball. That means we need forwards who are high volume 3-point snipers. That would open up the lanes for our slashing guards and allow Wemby to get isos in the post/at the top of the key.

With Harper's questionable shot and if they indeed keep Sochan, the back up big would then also have to be a stretch 5. Of course I totally expect them to again run out line ups with questionable spacing and take things slow, which would be pretty frustrating if we're still doing this.

Hearing that they are trying to keep Keldon, who's a 31% shooter from 3 and our worst defender, is even worse. He should be one of the first players on the trading block.

[LeBowen]

that makes fixing the back up C spot even more important. We really need somebody who flurishes in pick & rolls.

I've been saying it since last summer, this roster isn't functional as soon as Wemby sits. There will surely be opportunities to get a good rim protector/runner.
Imo, either Sorber at #14 or hopefully that Washington/Gafford trade idea I posted.

Another thing I'll repeat is that over the past 15 years the only playmaking guard taller than 6'4 selected in top5 and busted was Evan Turner, if we exclude career altering injuries to a couple of players.
Harper is a safe of a prospect as it gets. Even if he doesn't develop into a star, I can't see him being anything less than a solid 15/5/7 reliable playmaker.

[RC_Drunkford]

I've been saying it since last summer, this roster isn't functional as soon as Wemby sits. There will surely be opportunities to get a good rim protector/runner.
Imo, either Sorber at #14 or hopefully that Washington/Gafford trade idea I posted.

Another thing I'll repeat is that over the past 15 years the only playmaking guard taller than 6'4 selected in top5 and busted was Evan Turner, if we exclude career altering injuries to a couple of players.
Harper is a safe of a prospect as it gets. Even if he doesn't develop into a star, I can't see him being anything less than a solid 15/5/7 reliable playmaker.

I mean that's why he's the consensus #2 pick. Cause his only flaw is shooting off the dribble. The arch on his shot is a little too flat. But if Devin Vassell and Lonnie Walker can develop off the dribble shooting, there's no reason to believe Harper can't.

[LeBowen]

I mean that's why he's the consensus #2 pick. Cause his only flaw is shooting off the dribble. The arch on his shot is a little too flat. But if Devin Vassell and Lonnie Walker can develop off the dribble shooting, there's no reason to believe Harper can't.

I'm not too worried about his shot.
The most important thing is that he doesn't hesitate and is taking every shot he should. Percentages and shot mechanic will come over the next few years.

For comparison, I thought Castle won't be a shooting threat at all and he's made 95 3pts in his rookie season. A lot of which were off the dribble or a few steps behind the line.

If Harper's Parker-like efficency at the rim translates, it's over in combination with Wemby's spacing.

[kxs783kms]

Duncan took an 11.5 million pay cut in 2012 and 5 millions in 2015. Duncan was not a generational talent? Who were the superstar deserving of a max contract playing with Duncan in his first years?

My point exactly. Spurs fans STILL living in the past and thinking everybody who comes to this team should be a Duncan or Ginobli.This is 2025, not a decade ago. Vic is not Duncan. Still he will deserve every penny and more from a corporation generating millions of dollars annually off of his name and likeness alone. You wouldn't give your employer a discount for the work you do and neither should Vic.

[exstatic]

Duncan took an 11.5 million pay cut in 2012 and 5 millions in 2015. Duncan was not a generational talent? Who were the superstar deserving of a max contract playing with Duncan in his first years?

2012 was 15 years into his career. People are expecting Wemby to cough up money in his 5th season.

[Blizzardwizard]

i could maybe see PATFO convincing Wemby to take a paycut on his second extension down the line depending on their needs and who's available on the market.


no way he takes a cut on his first extension though and nor should he. he'll get the max available and it'll be good business.

[KobesAchilles]

Wemby is going to be the first 100 million a year player. He’s not turning that down or taking less.

[Frenchfred]

My point exactly. Spurs fans STILL living in the past and thinking everybody who comes to this team should be a Duncan or Ginobli.This is 2025, not a decade ago. Vic is not Duncan. Still he will deserve every penny and more from a corporation generating millions of dollars annually off of his name and likeness alone. You wouldn't give your employer a discount for the work you do and neither should Vic.

I'm not saying that he has to, I said that he looks like a guy who would do it for the team. Are you really going to compare me leaving money on the table to somebody making 50-100 millions a year? Trust me, if I had that salary, I would take half and would care more about my legacy.

[dbestpro]

No way am I giving up Castle or Fox in a Durant trade. We are on the way up, not the way down.

[kxs783kms]

I'm not saying that he has to, I said that he looks like a guy who would do it for the team. Are you really going to compare me leaving money on the table to somebody making 50-100 millions a year? Trust me, if I had that salary, I would take half and would care more about my legacy.

We all know that the numbers given aren't what these athletes end up with. After paying lawyers, their agent, marketing team, taxes, etc, that money dwindles down quick. Most of these guys retire in their mid 30's if they even have a long lasting career. Some think Wemby's career will be even shorter than that. That means these guys have to live off the money they make for another 30-40 years or longer. Why do you think you see some of these professional athletes working in media, investing in businesses, etc afterwards? I wouldn't take a paycut when one day I may have a career ending injury and get released by the team, while the organization continues to make their millions annually despite my situation. Any player would be a fool to give a team a paycut if they can get max pay.

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

We all know that the numbers given aren't what these athletes end up with. After paying lawyers, their agent, marketing team, taxes, etc, that money dwindles down quick. Most of these guys retire in their mid 30's if they even have a long lasting career. Some think Wemby's career will be even shorter than that. That means these guys have to live off the money they make for another 30-40 years or longer. Why do you think you see some of these professional athletes working in media, investing in businesses, etc afterwards? I wouldn't take a paycut when one day I may have a career ending injury and get released by the team, while the organization continues to make their millions annually despite my situation. Any player would be a fool to give a team a paycut if they can get max pay.

True

[scott]

I’ll respond to you directly instead of the guy you’re quoting. Never enjoyed engaging with him since all he cares about is throwing personal insults.

That said, I think it’s off to say the Spurs were building around Vassell, Keldon, or Sochan. The last real core they tried to build around was Kawhi and Aldridge. Once that ended, they shifted gears completely. They started tearing things down, collecting assets, and positioning themselves for the draft.

They were not building around those guys. They were waiting for someone like Wemby to come along. And now, for the first time since that era, it feels like they might actually believe they have more than one real core piece on the roster. Wemby is obviously the centerpiece, but Fox and Castle might be the first players they truly feel comfortable building around for the long term.

That is the entire premise of this thread. It is a hypothetical based on the idea that the front office believes it has finally found its core. Not just the top two or three players from any random year, but a real foundation to move forward with.

It’s the core until someone better comes along or they decide it’s not. Even if there is some grand master plan… things change, and the front office will adapt.

As fans, we naturally want to identify a core and start hoping that group will be the one that takes us where we hope to be… just like fans did with the Power of Friendship at one time. That’s my point here.