Reply With Quote
At that point in the draft, there isn’t enough differentiation in players to trade two for one. You’re literally just giving away a pick. Better to trade for future assets/picks.
We will definitely have some decisions to make. Your scenario above is probably a realistic scenario if they have their eyes on someone in the mid teens they think will be taken before the Raps/Celts picks.
This board should manage expectations about moving deep into the lottery though. It’s very unlikely to happen and would be costly. No team is trading a top 5 pick for all 3 of our firsts IMO.
I’m not getting my hopes up however and fully expect us to take 3 more players who probably have solid NBA careers but don't move the needle any time soon. More Vassell, Primo type picks.
Last edited by KingKev; 03-17-2022 at 05:41 AM.
At that point in the draft, there isn’t enough differentiation in players to trade two for one. You’re literally just giving away a pick. Better to trade for future assets/picks.
I don't think your idea is bad but imo it's way better to draft at 19 and 22 for example than only at 15. This draft after the first picks is really open and you'll have talent in this first round. Better to have two than one, above all if it's for winning 4-5 places in the draft.
I would only think the Spurs would package 19 and 22 for a pick around the 15 range if there was someone at 15 who they really like or someone who slides. Those two picks might even get you up to pick 13 or 14.
Between our 4 picks JRich, McDermott, Vassell, Keldon, Jak and Langford we have options to put together a package or packages for a solid piece or two. I’d throw Primo in there too depending in how PATFO views him by season’s end.
If a few of our picks are moved I think it is more likely to consolidate our plethora of solid bench players for a true starter.
Nah, if there's a player you want at 15 you trade up to get him. Especially in this draft, which looks like a bare cupboard.
If it’s bare cupboard, there won’t be anyone worth a 2 for 1 at 15.
If it was a bare cupboard none of the players would fit inside.
After last night, looks like Washington and Lakers are in free-fall. I still think the Knicks are playing for pride and won't loose too much.
But Washington has tumbled from the play-in race and weren't remotely compe ive last night.
Lakers look gassed and disinterested and ashamed. Which is hilarious, but has consequences
Spurs are one win below New Orleans, but the Pels still seem to want a play-in (and they don't own their pick). Spurs are two wins below Los Angeles, but it's hard to see the Lakers turn it around.
LAL, Washington, and New York are all sitting at 29 wins, with the Spurs sitting at 27. I see a very good chance that not only the Spurs leap the Lakers for the play-in, they wind up with more wins than at least two of those teams, leaving them at 10 or 11.
Yeah, OK. We barely beat OKC last night by having the least clutch player on our roster hit a clutch 3 pointer with a second left, and you think we’re going on some sort of a tear?
spurs are not playing well at all right now-especially on the defensive end of the court
Did I say "go on a tear"? Lol.
I think they'll go around .500, maybe a little worse. Meanwhile, the Lakers have the third hardest remaining schedule and look like dog . Washington's remaining is easier, but they have no incentive to win. Only the Spurs out of the three isn't going to overtly tank.
Unless the Lakers find a soul they do not possess, the chance of the Spurs overtaking them is significant.
I agree about the Spurs play in chances. The upcoming game against NO will be very important, as a win would not only put the Spurs level with them in the win column but would also secure the tie breaker. And with Lakers in a freefall even the 9th seed is possible.
The play-in is ours for the taking. This organization is too prideful for us not to go for it.
It’s quite the conundrum because on the whole this team really is trying to win and has been all-season but still just as good as teams who are clearly tanking and those teams all have potential foundational pieces and we have nothing outside of Murray.
For a team playing .386 ball, .500 is going on a tear. It’s an appreciable jump in play level.
You also shouldn’t look at wins. Look at losses. Those lock you in to a position. Washington has played 2 less games than we have, but we have 4 more losses. We have 3 more losses than the Lakers.
The Spurs have a weird EOY schedule that is both heavy with teams they should lose to, like Memphis, GSW x2, etc., and teams they could beat. Those include the Rox, NOP x2 and Portland x3.
Those Portland games could be gimmes. The games against the good teams may be against teams that have pulled back to avoid injury with their PO positions locked in.
The Pelicans are a question mark. As mentioned, they do not own their draft pick and are members of the play-in, but who knows. Again, the Spurs are only one win off them right now.
What I think it comes down to is the Lakers, who are horrible. I think the team has all but given up. The Spurs are only two wins off. I'm too optimistic in seeing a .500 win rate for San Antonio, but the point is the only teams to pay attention to for their slots are these -- New Orleans, Los Angeles and Washington. Of those, only NOP seems capable or desirous of winning. On the other end, Portland and Sacramento, but I don't see them winning enough to swap places. Neither team has anything to play for.
When you’re in a race to the bottom, only look at the losses. We’re 2 ahead of NO, 3 ahead of LAL, and 4 ahead of Washington. New Orleans is playing to win, and I can’t imagine the networks being happy with LAL completely out of it.
Spurs need to just stop winning. Everything else will take care of itself
The problem is we aren’t covert tanking as you suggest, while our counterparts probably are. Games against teams with solidified playoff positioning are just as winnable as games against POR and NO. As long as DJ and Jak are playing regular minutes this team is gunning for that play-in.
Those last four games vs the Wolves, Warriors, Mavs and Nuggets might be scratches for the other side depending on how the cookie crumbles.
Remember the Warriors 9th-15th men beat the brakes off us last time around so this is probably going to the wire.
Spurs definitely aren’t tanking… Pop looks way more engaged the past month or so than he did all season long. Chasing his record lit a fire under him. He’s playing Richardson big minutes, often over Primo, because he’s trying to win, not develop guys while tanking.
Last night would’ve been a perfect game to drop off we were tanking. He played Lonnie throughout the 4th Qtr because he was hot. He could’ve easily sat him. He didn’t. He doesn’t give a about our pick. He won’t even be here to long enough to care about whoever we draft. Pop wants to win and he wants to win now.
Or, Richardson is being showcased for contenders, and he’s intentionally sabotaging winning by force feeding Lonnie.
That's the wrong way of looking at it. Wins are less likely to happen, so you look at the wins. The reverse for good teams.
The most losses ‘wins’. Tracking wins is foolish in a contest of losses.
We’re technically still ahead of Portland, because if we both lose all of our games, we will have a worse record.
Everyone plays the same number of games. Watching losses doesn't make sense because they all lose a lot. The wins are outliers, so you track the wins. But do whatever works for you.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions