Reply With Quote
Trading down or for an established player?
The Hoop Doctors | 2022 NBA Mock Draft: Top 10 Picks
admin, May 23, 2022
9. San Antonio Spurs: Bennedict Mathurin
Gregg Popovich and the San Antonio Spurs are always looking for a specific kind of player in the NBA Draft, and Bennedict Mathurin fits that mold. Mathurin exploded on the scene at Arizona last year, and he will be an impact player at the next level.
Trading down or for an established player?
Neither will bust.
I actually don't think Methurin fits the 'specific kind of player' mold Popovich looks for. Not saying he wouldn't like him, but this isn't a Popovich type.
Player or future picks. Not a popular idea, but if this is a flat draft, couldn’t we get the most value from 9, tie up less money with later picks and hope for better results next year?
I'm a believer in Quality over Quan y.
You need stars to win in this league and moving up to 4 in this draft gives you a chance at getting a star level talent. Barring injury of course Sharpe and Ivey are no miss talents to me.
The 9th pick this year is not likely to net an all star player(most likely a solid starter) unless the unexpected happens and a couple of teams reach.
The pick in the 20s might just be a role player if your lucky and many of those picks don't even make the team. Josh Richardson is not worth giving up a chance at a future top 10 talent in the league.
The lotto protected pick also doesn't hurt too bad as it saves you from losing a top pick next year with a bad season so it's not a bad trade if you really look deep into it and don't get caught up that you're giving so much up (quan y)because you really aren't.
Pop would pass on Mathurin for Sochan.
Spurs should just try to unload the 25 to a team without a first rounder this year (NOP, LAL) for an unprotected first next year. Teams without a first round pick often feel desperate to try and get into the action. Spurs don't need four picks.
Not likely to get an unprotected for that low of a pick but probably a protected is what the Spurs will do.
Disrespectful to Vassell and Primo.
I don't think trading it for a future pick makes any sense. Trading for a player hypothetically could make sense if the Spurs want to go their version of all-in next year (although I don't want them to trade 9). The value of 9 probably gets you a Grant or John Collins...maybe even a little better... I don't think those are wise trades though..
??? New Orleans has a FRP, lottery in fact. They got it when the Lakers dropped out of the playoffs. LA owes NO a pick swap option next year, too. Not sure if you can trade the option or not. They also owe NO their 2024 FRP.
Teams without a FRP in this draft:
Toronto
Boston
Clippers
Lakers
Phoenix
Utah
Philly
Doubt we entertain trading picks back to TOR or BOS. Both LA teams are in huge pick debt. Our best bets to trade with a team lacking an FRP are PHO, UTH, PHI. There also may be teams wanting an extra FRP.
^ we are going to struggle to move these 2022 draft picks for future picks (I suspect) without paying a cost due to the market Ex described above.
Unload like it's a burden? Not all drafts are equal, and there will be players available at 25 that may not be there next year... so if there's someone we like I'd rather take the chance now (even if we take on 3 rookies) than putting it off for a year where there may be no one worth the pick. So no. unless there's no one we like or we get a good enough offer.
I REALLY like this kid @20 ... him @25 would be a total steal IMO
The key could be teams that want an extra pick. PHO can trade their 2024 without question. Utah has an outstanding debt 2024 FRP that could extend with protections to 2026, meaning their first available FRP would be 2028. OTOH, if it conveys in 2024, their 2026 pick would be available. I think the trade language could be written 2028 FRP, or two years after the 2024 pick conveys. Chicago, Indy, NYK and ATL each have an extra FRP for next year. Brooklyn has a FRP from Philly in 2027. Memphis has a VERY lightly protected 2024 GS FRP. New Orleans is frikkin loaded, having a 23 pick swap and 24 FRP from LAL, and 2024/2026 swaps and 2025/2027 FRPs from MIL. Orlando has extra 2023 and 2025 FRPs. Portland has an extra 2025 FRP.
There are tradeable FRPs out there.
So, kick it 3/4 years down the road. Much more likely that lightning strikes in that time period.
You can't effectively develop 3-4 players at one time. There aren't the staff resources or the time for practices during the season. You have to take a chance, and kick the pick down the road. This isn't some special draft where a monster player is going to drop to 25. Maybe you get lucky and hit the rumored 'double draft' where they let the HS players enter again.
I appreciate that insight and knowledge here I really do. Problem is other teams like OKC, Charlotte etc also have multiple picks so there are probably going to be a few teams jockeying to defer FRPs.
OKC and Houston both have two picks, but they will be much more expensive than our 20 and/or 25. OKCs are 1 and 12, and Houston's are 3 and 17. Those lottery picks are going to cost multiple FRPs, where ours will be a 1 for 1 exchange for a future FRP.
Houston literally had four first-rounders last year. I made a post a few months back showing that the clear majority of drafts have had teams that have made at least three picks. The irony is that in the case where a team came into the draft with three picks but dump one, the pick that gets dumped has turned out to be the best player of the three. A team that wants a first badly enough to trade future assets for it almost always does so because there is a player they really like who falls low enough to take a chance on. Why teams are wrong about players they fall in love with all the time, they are right often enough to where I'd be wary of a call when the Spurs have the 25th from some team looking to trade future assets for it. The last thing you want is to give up the next Thybulle or Bane trying to be cute with your warchest.
Mind you, that's different than using a first to trade up. Historically, that doesn't often work out that well either. But if you see a guy and have the means, it could make sense. The point was about planning to trade away firsts for future assets rather than just making the picks.
It depends on what kind of players you take. If it's 3 Primos or Pokusevskis you're talking about, sure. There's no room for multiple guys in your roster that will take playing time and won't be productive for 2/3 year . But take the Pelicans for instance. Last year they took 3 rookies: Trey Murphy, Herb Jones and Alvarado. All three productive from day one, and all three with upside left.
With Lonnie & Richardson likely on their way out, probably Poeltl as well, are you going to tell me that you can't add a third rookie because of Wieskamp, KBD, Landale?... I'd much rather take a flyer on Liddell, Kendall Brown, Wesley, Hardy, Kamagate, or whomever could be reasonably productive and falls, than missing out because you want to keep your 13th, 14th or 15th guy.
So in short. If no one we like is available, sure, trade it away. Or if you get a good offer, like trading up, or for a future pick projected to go higher. But trading it away just for the notion that you can't add 3 rookies (when reality shows you can) can be a wasted opportunity.
If JRich andPoodle are moved, there will be contracts coming back. It’s not all just about roster spots, though The Spurs have the player development program they do because they limit themselves to two players per year. That’s how they get a #29 pick from the streets into the ASG. That’s how they get another #29 pick to be a 17 point scorer who shoots 40% from deep. It takes time and attention to develop quality NBA players. The Spurs know that, and they have a formula and a process.
Maybe the answer is more guys “from the streets”
Alvarado wasn't drafted and NOP was a complete fluke.
Houston, meanwhile, sucked.
FFS this isn't a thing. The Spurs don't "limit themselves to two players". They usually have two rookies because they have two draft picks, like the average NBA team does. They also bring in UDFAs and cast-offs to serve either as two-way players or direct signing to the Toros. Last year, they have Primo, Wieskamp and Ca . In 2019, they had Sam, Keldon, Weatherspoon and Eubanks. "But Eubanks was actually a rookie in 2018" So what? The program isn't a one-season thing. Improvement doesn't just happen in training montages. It takes years of instruction, practice and physical maturation. Insofar as the Spurs have some developmental academy, it doesn't manifest in a big one-year jump where the player reaches their potential and stays there.
Also, I think repping Murray as some unique triumph for making it as an alternate due to a guy drafted at 35 bowing out, where there were six other guys drafted in the 20s or later, teeters on the edge between Spurs homerism and Spurs nationalism. They are not superlative developing guys to the point where we should mythologize idiosyncrasies of their history as necessary steps of their process. They haven't earned that and probably don't even want it. It makes even less sense given that it was the Spurs that acquired the three firsts in the first place. If there's something necessary to their process that requires them to not let too many younguns into their super-secret hyperbolic time chamber, someone should tell them that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
