Reply With Quote
IMO it's Wemby or trade down.
I don't like the idea of a 6'2 PG as a centerpiece unless he has god-like 3 point shooting. Like would Tony Parker be worth a top 5 pick in today's NBA?
You only trade Sochan if you’re getting back a lottery pick better than ten AND another future first. The Mavs can’t offer that. And even then I don’t do it. Sorry Cuban, enjoy your one man show with sideshow Kyrie.
IMO it's Wemby or trade down.
I don't like the idea of a 6'2 PG as a centerpiece unless he has god-like 3 point shooting. Like would Tony Parker be worth a top 5 pick in today's NBA?
I don’t think I’d even do that. Unless it’s a top 3 pick. There’s no player in this draft from 4-8 that I’d want over Sochan and an additional 1st is likely to be out if the lottery.
The giannis/kawhi stuff elides the truth that both players needed the right team to develop. But thats more of indictment of teams which never develop stars. But yeah the quest for HOF guys is probably best served my not homing in on “necessary“ stats like height, 3pt shot, etc and look for totality of skills,intelligence, hard work, and strength. This is how primo makes sense over sengun.
Obviously every situation is different, but the Spurs historically have not been known to “trade down” or create “bidding wars” for their picks. They just pick outright whoever they want with their selection, even if it’s considered a reach (see: Primo, Joshua).
demand for picks after top 8 decreases exponentially , and the spurs have been talent starved for nearly 20 years. They really don';t need extra picks over top talent so i agree there will be no trade. But the bust potential is extra high with top 5 picks so it's really scary if we don't get a tyop2 pick
I think when most posters are talking about trading down, they’re not thinking of dropping from 2,3 to 10, but from 2,3 to 4,5,6 and grab another pick around 10-12.
Exactly
I'm not doing this personally.
I’m okay with Scoot at #2 if the Spurs are confident that they can help his shot. For what I’ve read about Scoot, he exemplifies the Spurs culture, driven, unselfish player who is a team first. The Spurs will have plenty of time to evaluate his mechanics at workout, and Scoot will equally have ample chance to prove himself.
As much as I like Miller as a scorer and a knockout shooter, Pop likes his players who can pass. Scoot, Amen, Walker are better at top 7, while Hendricks can also shoot and a better all-around defender. Of course, if Spurs don’t like Miller at #2, they need to explore trading down and maximize what they can get for Miller.
uriel was trying to argue that past drafting is evidence of the current spurs meta, and it's just not the same team, GM, or draft scenario. I've previously said the spurs might just suck drafting top 10 because all their experience is uncovering hidden gems, overlooked upperclassmen, and guys who fall on draft day.
As to the point the smell test on all those trade downs, is "do the spurs really think they don't need top talent such that the risk of a costly bust is fine, or are they cowards who like presti want to cower in mediocrity sitting on huge pick haul" It's funny when people say thopson, miller etc are such bad picks that the spurs won't want them but another team will pay two lottery picks for. That's just dumb and dishonest. There are two likelier scenarios where the spurs trade for a later pick and a future pick, or a player and future pick.
Occam's razor is that the spurs pick an established top player with a top 5 pick. Spursfans want to pretend the spurs have a big board with wemby on top and just a massive inkblot after that.
So, the play in tournament left three ties in the lottery: OKC/CHI at 42 losses, IND/WAS at 47 losses, and SAS/HOU at 60 losses.
May the odds ever be in your favor.
I don't think spurs need another 2 good but not great youngsters to add up to the pile. Pick a guy you believe has star potential (Wemby, Scoot, Thompson bros...) then try to develop him as such.
Saying that Giannis should have gone #1 is results-oriented thinking. 20/20 hindsight.
Let's say a team thinks Player A has a 30% chance of (eventually) getting multiple All-Star selections, while Player B has a 10% chance. All else being equal they will draft Player A every time.
If Player B ends up actually making multiple All-Star teams and Player A doesn't, does that mean the team made a bad decision? My opinion is that the answer is no. Maybe whatever model they used (doesn't have to be strictly or even partially mathematical) was flawed, but based on the best information and judgment they had at draft time, they made the right choice.
It wasn't something I read so much as my perception of the twins and what we know of what the Spurs look for.
Thompson isn't a PG, he's more like a point forward and unlike Henderson, he looks more like a complimentary than centerpiece type.
We don’t know what the Spurs will do with a non #1 top 5 pick in the year 2023. The last time they had one, the picked Sean Elliott at #3, and he was the 1989 Wooden Award winner, a college junior, and would be the slam dunk #2 pick in this draft. Players that complete, with that clear of a path to All S om aren’t available after #1 in this, or nearly any other draft.
I also don’t think the Spurs have a mono blob of talent after #1. What I DO think is that their board looks VERY different from other team’s boards, and that you can leverage those inconsistencies into an extra lottery pick or later year lightly protected pick.
The spurs have made specific statements like "we targeted Lonnie at a top 5 and got lucky he fell" i go back and forth about whether this is fluffing the p[layers confidence and trade value or a legitimate statement. But if it is a legitimate statement, you can bet the spurs will have strong opinions about who to draft and will want to use their best pick in ages. I t does suck having to pay for a marginal prospect but i don't think the spurs see it like that.
A trade to get hendricks would be a good deal.
I like Taylor Hendricks at PF more than Sochan. He's quicker on defense, a better rebounder and shot blocker and shoots the ball better from the perimeter and has greater overall athleticism.
Think he has a higher ceiling both offensively and defensively.
Don't fall in love with a player because he's currently on the team. If Hendricks was currently on the team you would not want Sochan over him.
Taylor Hendricks is more talented than Sochan both offensively and defensively and would be an upgrade if the Spurs can exchange the two.
You see shooting and shot blocking as analogous to offense and defense, but they’re not. They’re only one facet of each.
This guy gets it.
There's a discrepancy between the sort of player you want to find at 3-6 and the players that will be there this year. We really have to pay attention to rookie scale contracts. If you blow a pick #18, it's no big deal salary-wise. If you blow a #3 pick, you've got a problem. It's even a problem if that player is only 'pretty good.' This was a big problem for Phoenix dealing with Ayton. This was the reason Wiseman had to be moved and now his salary range is a Detroit headache.
This is the reason a lot of bad teams get into cap . Houston is going to face having to pay Jalen Green and Jabari Smith the salary scale for #2 picks. It's an issue.
There will likely be a difference between what the team's Big Board is and what the 'general consensus' will be. And the questions won't be "Would it be cool to have Amen Thompson on this team" but rather "How much will Amen Thompson cost us relative to the pick and money?"
The team sure as won't say they like Taylor Hendricks or Cason Wallace or whatever. They're going to say they're really high on Thompson. That's where the General Consensus board is. My unsurprised feeling is they value a Hendricks more than a Thompson and there's very little question about this -- OR, they value Thompson at pick #8 and know they won't get him there.
So, depending on where they land in the lotto, they will try to optimize value, cost, and position. They'll try to squeeze value out of the top of the draft by interest in those players by other teams. Because -- just going with the thread of thought -- no players in this draft are actually worth the 3-6 picks (more or less).
Will Gottlieb@Will_Gottlieb
League Source: NBA will flip coins on Monday to determine Draft standings tie breakers
12:26pm · 15 Apr 2023 · Twitter for iPhone
Am I the only one who prefers Brandon Miller?
[QUOTE=vander;10884110]IMO it's Wemby or trade down.
I don't like the idea of a 6'2 PG as a centerpiece unless he has god-like 3 point shooting. Like would Tony Parker be worth a top 5 pick in today's NBA?[/QUOTE]
Parker was not just a 19 yrs old kid. He was considered a multiple years veteran in a compe ive league against men. Yes I would take Parker in the top 5 in this draft.
All this makes one fatal assumption, and that is players are destined to become what they become, regardless of cir stances. But there is very much a case to be made that Kawhi becomes Kawhi in large part because he was drafted by the Spurs. Likewise with Giannis. Yes, in hindsight, Giannis should have gone number 1 - but if he does, then maybe he's out of the league just like Anthony Bennett as this point.
The random Tankathon mock I just ran has Dariq Whitehead going 25 to Memphis. If Dariq Whitehead becomes an all-star in 3 years and Amen Thompson gets picked by the Rockets and doesn't, it will be easy to look at that and say the Rockets should have taken Whitehead at 3 instead of Thompson. But that ignores that Whitehead becoming what he did may have heavily relied upon the fact he was playing off of Ja instead of learning to be an undisciplined chucker in Houston. So Houston takes Whitehead #3, gets absolutely hammered in the press and by fans, then Whitehead doesn't become an all-star, because the Rockets continue to suck, and the GM gets ceremoniously fired.
It's not as simple as just "take the guy you think is best whenever your pick comes up"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions