Reply With Quote
RE GARD LESS
He will be unrestricted in 2024. If they trade him to Orlando, he'll be unrestricted. If they trade him to OKC, he will be unrestricted. And so on.
Better to sell low, than to let him walk.
RE GARD LESS
He will be unrestricted in 2024. If they trade him to Orlando, he'll be unrestricted. If they trade him to OKC, he will be unrestricted. And so on.
Yeah, I don't see Keldon being traded anytime soon.
I've gone on record as stating that I don't think he is a true #1 option on a contending team...but he could be a good #3 or even #2. That said, he is committed to the organization, the locker room seems to love him, and he is one of Pop's current golden boys so I don't see him going anywhere while Pop is here unless some team throws out a deal the Spurs can't refuse.
Just read an ESPN article reminding that spurs have 31 picks (12 FRPs and 19 SRPs) in the next seven years.
19SRPs. Damn. I’m sure there are some fat guys with skills we can target in there somewhere. Ha.
For someone who's acting like your point is so simple, you're missing a pretty straightforward point. Brown isn't necessarily going to hit free agency. He can get a max extension with the new CBA. If a team he wants to go to does not have cap space, then trading for him and extending him is a viable option. Even if he does hit free agency, if a team he'd prefer to stay at has his Bird rights, he can just stay there and not lose the money he'd give up taking SA's cap space. If SA wanted him, then they'd probably need to either trade for him or have a plan to trade for someone while hitting the lotto to set up a "big three" situation to entice him to sign over other teams. The Spurs don't have leverage over marquee free agents right now. They don't even have as much cap space as some other teams now. They can and should be willing to wade in a bit and use that space to improve their position. But they would have to be proactive to bring in talent, which means trading for guys and trying to extend them rather than assuming they'll even get a meeting next summer.
I don't think Jaylen Brown extends. The main benefit to trading for him is that you'd eliminate the threat of teams without cap space. If you're feeling confident he's unlikely to choose any other team with cap space, that means you pretty much guarantee he resigns, or at least you can recoup your assets via S&T. As long as you didn't pay something ridiculous, it may be a worthwhile gamble.
That figure is misleading: besides our own we have 5 extra firsts (Charlotte '24 protected 14-14, Toronto '24 protected 6-6-6, Chicago '25 protected 10-8-8, Atlanta '25 & '27), the 2 swaps (Atlanta '26 unrestricted, Boston '28 protected 1) aren't additional picks. Also, the 2nd rounders will largely be crap that's only usable as a trading chip (trading up in the draft, round up a deal, move an unwanted contract, etc), that number probably translates to 1 pick per year when we have a single pick, or maybe none if we have multiple firsts. We should probably be rotating players faster, meaning making a decision faster and not get enamored with too many players that take too much time to develop (Wesley, Barlow), and not get too attached to players without high ceiling (Mamu, Champagnie). A season or 2 is enough to get a sense of their trajectory, and then move. That would help avoid clogging the roster.
He's definitely second banana, and Boston's media never fails to let him know that. A new contract is also more lucrative than an extension, and most players want to hit UFA at least once to do the tour and dog and pony show.
So in the next 7 years, we have 5 extra FRPs, plus our own 7. How is their figure of 12 in any way misleading? Last time I checked, 5 + 7 = 12.
Yeah, I believe everyone understands that. But that 31 potential picks is still a pretty impressive number that reflects the state of the spurs and the possibilties and flexibility they could have in their rebuild.
I meant that 31 picks sounds like a lot, but almost all those 2nds won't translate into players on the roster, and even those firsts aren't that many when you consider that any team gets 7 firsts in the same time frame. So it's essentially 5 more firsts than the norm, plus a bunch of chips to play with. But thanks for the math lesson, whenever I have a doubt on the matter I'll be sure to check with you.
These SRPs will be interesting to watch, not just for the Spurs but league-wide. 1) Teams went wild trading picks for players and so few teams have a greater concentration of FRPs, 2) The trade deadline was wild with the number swapped around, 3) The new CBA makes it sound like teams over that doulbe luxury tax line will have difficulty adding pieces to their squads.
Potentially SRP could be useful for teams who have traded off their FRPs and cannot easily add talent because of being choked up in salaries. But it's hard to really see this to be the case. The Second Round is still a den of iffy and barely passable talents. There is a chance that the round becomes more enticing with older players as the first round increasingly loads up on babies, but I dunno. I suspect no one in the NBA really knows.
That said, the Spurs have done an excellent job of loading the coffers with picks while moving players to playoff teams. The big questions involve roster management and asset management.
Fair enough. However, 5 extra FRPs is a lot when there is a shortage of them available for trade league-wide. It's not just the ones that have been traded, but the year before and the year after are off limits by the CBA, and on multi year opportunities like Chicago, they have 3 years blocked, plus the year before and the year after. Once the pick conveys, those block offs go away, but there are a lot of them out there.
Good point. Whether or not 5 extra firsts seems like a lot, the fact is that the Spurs have the flexibility to trade up to 9 first round picks starting on draft night (keeping a pick in each of 2025/2027/2029 to say in compliance with the Stepien Rule). And that's not even including the Hawks 2026 and Celtics 2028 swap rights, which I'm pretty sure could also be included in a trade.
With so many teams prevented from trading any firsts at all, the Spurs control a large part of the supply of firsts. If the demand for those starts to pick up the Spurs stand to benefit.
It would be funny if the Stepien Rule ever gets extended to cover second round picks. I don't see a reason to do it though. Most seconds don't stick anyway.
My hope is that we have multiple picks in the years that there aren’t multiple teams that also own 3 picks (like last year). It’s harder to play those teams off each other to make moves.
Back to Jaylen Brown, idk about anyone else but I'd sure as be down a team that looked like:
PG / Tre / Blake
Devin / Bran / Grizzled Vet Shooter
Jaylen / Keldon / Champagnie
Wemby / Sochan /Mamu
Collins / Bassey / Young Backup Big
Assuming you could get Jaylen Brown for some of our draft capital in a S&T next off-season or (more unlikely) sign and extend before then. Then it really leaves PG as the glaring weak spot on the roster. Tre could be a passable starter, with Devin, Jaylen, Bran and Sochan getting some minutes as ballhandler as well.
One can dream.
Vassell: Fair enough on the contract, though keep in mind Johnson came in lower than expected and though the former is better than the likes of Barrett and Hunter, they have something (draft pedigree + the latter plays a premium position) he doesn't. You can debate the merits of that, but not the reality.
Johnson, Collins and Jones: When I said role, I mean more so in an ideal setting, how does this archetype fit. The former can't create for himself or others efficiently and isn't a 3 and D type, so he's more of a backup in that scenario.
Sochan: He's not already a solid starter. He can't create efficient offense, shoot at all, rebound and his defense wasn't as impactful as it was hyped. I see the ceiling as more so Gordon (Aaron), which is elite role player.
Bates-Diop: Lack of roster space and the reality that he'll likely be relatively in demand by good or aspiring to be (premium position, won't break the bank) teams is why I don't see him returning.
^ interesting reminder that spurs still have cap room to take on a trash contract for a pick on draft night.
I'm pretty sure the Spurs can't absorb a contract that's about to expire into cap space, but they should be able to take back a player who is under contract for next season or beyond. I don't expect the Spurs to be in the hunt for any major free agents so using the cap space on draft night, rather than later in the summer, should be perfectly fine.
One thing I learned from that video is that team and player salaries "freeze" on the last day of the regular season when it comes to calculating luxury tax payments and the salary floor, so the Spurs could absorb a player into cap space on draft night without it taking money out of the pockets of the players that finished the season on the roster.
Portland is happy with Sharpe and see big things from him in the future.
They are looking to add a veteran and keep sharpe if they don't get a top two or three pick which is the smart play for this year.
Aren't we allowed to have 17 contracts now, with 2 of them being 2-way deals? If so, I want to keep the top 15 players on your list. Then, my dream scenario is to win the lottery and draft Victor. Then, I want to trade back into the lottery, using both of our 2nds this draft, plus one or two future 1sts in order to draft Kris Murray.
Now our team is ready to build a winning foundation again.
PG - Jones, Graham
SG - Vassell, McDermott, Branham, Champagnie, Langford, Wesley
SF - KJ, Bates-Diop, Murray
PF - Sochan, Mamu, Barlow
C- Wemby, Collins, Bassey
But, if we had to let go of anyone......Langford and McDermott
I don't think you'll have to get into the lottery to get Murray.
Teams were allowed 17 contracts before the new CBA. They will be allowed 18 going forward.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions