Reply With Quote
Sure, but it sounds like you think SA should keep LMA and/or DeRozan and move the other pieces to rebuild around one or both vs trading LMA and DeRozan?
Nobody in this draft (in the range we're talking about) is better than the guys in your trade but that's not the point. The point is twofold- 1) the young guys in the draft in our range have the upside to be better than the incoming guys in your trade but the main thing is 2) the guys you're bringing in aren't as good as the guys were sending out and we are paying (draft picks) for the privilege.
You pick a lane...either trade peripheral pieces and picks to upgrade around DDR and LMA or trade DDR, LMA, Gay etc for space and picks or young players (which is my preference). Either way...we should pick lane and go with it..
Sure, but it sounds like you think SA should keep LMA and/or DeRozan and move the other pieces to rebuild around one or both vs trading LMA and DeRozan?
Not true.
Option 2, none of it, wait for the big 2 to retire, and go youth then. Promote Forbes to coach.
Advantages: continuity, no bad contracts, preserves options to tank or sign
new role players
I think you're using stronger language than I'd want to. I see it more like upgrading the talent level of the roster while making the players still on the team fit better. Yes, that means you think of LMA and DMDR as your best players, but you don't move your best prospects just because they aren't ideal fits next to those two.
u have really strong faith that 15-20th pick player could become better than bogdanovic or lauri. So it means that u wouldnt do a hipothetical trade swap bogdanovic for keldon or lauri for luka samanic??
Picks aren't just better because of potential upside, but they stay cost controlled longer than what your getting for trade. The Spurs aren't in particularly bad shape cap wise, but no reason to take more prospects if they're not going to be cheap over there same period
Yeah giving away picks to remain mediocre is the perfect road to a rebuild.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and you, you drove straight into a tree.
I keep saying it that this dude is the dumbest poster on this site all his trade ideas or moronic I think he has to be a little kid or something.Yeah giving away picks to remain mediocre is the perfect road to a rebuild.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and you, you drove straight into a tree.
yeah sure better let ddr and lma go, draft two 15-20th players, send them to g league and overpay old veterans during free agency bc noone good come here to play. Great idea to rebuild guys...
I dont have strong faith in any 15th pick being better than than the guys mentioned but, they have a chance to be whereas they players mentioned are are as good as they ever will be (known quan ies).
ok so when keldon become better than bogdanovic or samanic better than lauri call me
Whatever you do, don't trade your first rounders regardless of what you think of this draft class unless you have an absurd offer you can't refuse.
Getting better than mediocre isn't that hard, especially with max cap space. , they're mediocre now without gicing up anything.
All these trade scenarios here are re ed. People here want to trade the 2 best players on the team for more garbage. This roster is trash, but if you don't get a star or top 5 pick back for DeRozan or Aldridge then you don't trade them and you certainly don't trade them for Drummond, Aaron Gordon or Justice Winslow.
This team has enough youth. What they should do is improve the starting line up by moving the real garbage. That is Rudy Gay, Demarre Carroll, Trey Lyles, Marco Belinelli and Bryn Forbes. There are a few players out there who are not really doing to well on other teams, but would fit way better on the current Spurs team and start right away. That's what they should do. Now if you have to bundle the garbage with one young prospect who comes off the bench to improve the starting line up then you might do it if the return is right. That's what the George Hill trade was. Spurs moved a good bench player for a player who can start at a position of need and had upside.
Like if Atlanta wants Poeltl and you can get Hunter back in a deal that might be worth it depending on who else is included. But I don't see any package out there that improves the team by trading LA or Demar. All these proposals make the team worse while trading one of their 2 best players. Nobody in their right mind would do that. I'd target guys like Bogdanovic, Thad Young, Satoransky, Marvin Williams, Covington and see if it's possible to put a reasonable package together to get one of them.
Problem is, no one who can get them better than mediocre is coming here even with max cap space.
I think yesterday you and I agreed that a first round ick for Bogdanovich would be worth it. However I would give up a first for Beasley as well because I feel he he has upside as well.
I would. He has 6th moty potential, imho. There are deals the Spurs COULD offer that wouldn't require a 1st, but they wouldn't do them.
I think Beasley could be had for a second rounder or two + Forbes. If it came to that and a 1st for Bogdanovic, then I would then go for Beasley. Again, that would take a smart FO that isn't happy with trash like Forbes.
They aren't likely to get a franchise player in free agency, true. But they can combine good drafting and other moves to be a top-four seed ala Utah last year. That's a way better plan than selling All-NBA types and picks for players the caliber of which the team could easily draw in free agency.
1) The team doesn't have enough youth. No one on the roster deserves to be consider part of a real "young core". Maybe there are enough players on the roster who are young, but they can certainly stand to swap some of those parts out for better ones.
2) Trading AWAY players is almost always dumb. The team shouldn't be trying to trade guys like Forbes, Beli, whatever. They should be looking to acquire players or assets with those guys as ballast. You're not going to build a good team if you're only willing to move on from your bad players. If those guys really suck, then just don't play them. Pop apparently knows how to do that with Carroll.
Which part do you believe isn’t true? Tanking or contention is the way the league is or the Spurs don’t have a player to build around? Both?? Regardless, to blatantly respond with “not true” with so many examples would be unwise. Trust the process lol
what i find interesting is that despite demar's improved play as of late... i haven't come across any reports of teams being more interested in him.
Combo of 2 things: SA is quieter than most and SA likely isn’t that interested in moving DeRozan
So instead of trading demar derozan and getting say a pick betwen 18 - 25 and a younger player on a cheaper contract, you don't trade him and he doesn't pick up is player option and he leaves and all you get for him is the salary relief of him not picking up his option ?
So next year you would rather have no demar instead of next year having say no demar + a young player + whatever pick you get for trading demar ?
I am very confident that if I ask any basketball person if they would rather have aaron gordon and justice winslow or would they rather have demar derozan and lamarcus aldridge, gordon and winslow wins that by a landslide...
NO to Winslow.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
