No
Answer to OP's question:
No.
Scoot is a 6'2" player. League is evolving to a place where the elite teams will have long, tall playmakers. Scoot doesn't fit that.
Even with a supposed wingspan of 6'9", he's still 6'2". I think players of that height will be an endangered species in a few years on elite teams. You'll see plenty of 'em in the league but not at the core of the teams competing for championships. NBA is evolving.
I like Quickley or Giddey as potential fits. I'm partial to Giddey as I think his strengths complement or roster while simultaneously hiding his weaknesses. His end of year report praises his facilitating and passing while admonishing his lack of shooting and individual play making.
If we were to run him a a 6'8" pg he could run a high pick and role with Wemby and with their heights it would be difficult to stop. Keldon and Vassel are high end 3pt shooters and his facilitating could give them some good open looks. Most importantly he would be playing with 4 plus defenders who can all switch off and guard multiple positions.
He would be a great fit because we don't need him to shoot, he isn't a ball dominant guard, his height works well with Wemby, and we can live with his defensive liabilities. Plus he fits the timeline at 20. The biggest issue is what it would take to get him from OKC as they wouldn't need any of our draft capital and we wouldn't want to give up any players. If we could get a third team involved with an established player who wants to be traded we could maybe shift McDermotts expiring contact and 1 or 2 firsts (I'm thinking the ones with protections on them) we could pull it off.
You're not going to get Giddey away from OKC. They love him. OKC is also shaping up to be a prime rival for the rest of the decade. They're not gonna want to help us out. (We're gonna see a lot of Chet vs. Vic stuff coming up.)
There is a guy who plays a lot like Giddey in this draft, who happens to also play defense.
Scoot is high usage and his efficiency is in question at this point. I don't want to take those shots away from Victor and what we already have. He's also not a great defender, and not due to his size.
However... this seems an unusual draft where you have 3-4 point guard types who are also good defenders.
Absolutely not
Most decent players can get to 20 ppg with enough priority. Like Branham clearly has that potential, and do both Sochan and Wesley. Heck Champangie has real potential there as well. Neither Keldon or Devin were particularly efficient either. Vassell was more efficient when he was healthy and in rhythm, but both would clearly benefit from taking a step back. So I don't think they have to worry about missing out on value for Keldon. He has a good contract, but the Spurs don't need a value contract at this point, and by the time they do, Johnson will be expiring.
Obviously both guys have value, which is why they could be traded for a legit pick in the first place. You don't trade players because they suck. You trade them because you think you can improve the team's long-term position. Just as trading a good player in George Hill who has had a 15-year career for a real shot at addressing the team's major need was a good choice, trading a good player whose long-term fit is dicey to attack the team's biggest long-term needs could make sense. Johnson should have a long and healthy career, and that will also be true for other players the Spurs cut, trade or otherwise move on from. When you go from a vet team with scraps for young talent to a bad team with plenty of holes to a team loaded with young players, guys who seemed too intriguing to move on from become dime-a-dozen prospects.
That you seem confident that the Spurs are a playoff bound team this year is exactly why making a move for a top draft pick may be so important. They won't get another chance at one themselves next year. Yes, they shouldn't trade Keldon just to trade him. But if they thought they had a chance to draft one of the top players in the draft in the 5-15 range, then finding a way to still get that player makes sense. Just as there aren't Wembies or Lebrons in every draft, there aren't Kawhis, Georges or Haliburtons in the middle of the first every year. My point is that if the Spurs thought they might have seen one of those, they should be aggressive in getting them. That's not specifically what this thread is pushing, but that's what I think a few other posters are talking about in this thread.
Give me Anthony Black over Scoot tbh. Nothing against Scoot who I think will be a fine player for a long time with his athleticism, explosiveness, and tenacity. I’d just prefer Black given this roster. Bigger, better passer, better shooter, better defender, and he’s a Texas kid. He’d be a little cheaper to acquire as well. Prob a pipe dream either way, but that’s who I’d want if we traded back into the Top-10.
Being Texan does not matter and no he isn't better than Scoot.
Just read up on him. I'm in. I think with Washington still in the delusional stage of believing they can win it all we could get a third team involved and get him if he falls to 9. So a hypothetical:
Spurs get pick 9 to grab Black
Washington get a win now player to compliment Beal
Third team gets McDermott and 2 first rounders
The real question is who could we get at that price that Washington would want?
I said he’s a better passer, shooter, and defender right now, which are all true. I didn’t say he’s a better all-around player.
Yeah Black is very odd fit next to Wemby and Sochan. Don't understand the fascination with him besides being from Texas.
Have to disagree a little my friend. We see the draw of players wanting to go home all the time. LeBron left Miami because he wanted to get Cleveland a championship. Nephew blew up our world to get back to California. Even LA picked us to get back to Texas. Picking someone from Texas doesn't guarantee they won't want to leave, but you'll know you have the draw of their family and friends being closer so when free agency hits that can factor in.
As for the Black/Scoot thing, you're right. Scoot is a better player and will probably be a better player in the future. But he doesn't fit the roster we have built. He's a ball dominant guard that will take touches away from Vic and shots away from Vassel and Johnson. Black is a better facilitator and doesn't need the ball to be successful. He can run a better pick and roll and hit the open shooters. Plus he's stout on defense and wouldn't cost as much to move up to grab him. Why pay more for a player who is a worse fit?
Black is far from perfect. His shot definitely needs improvement. But he’s already a great passer and a defensive monster at his age. And he’s plenty good at lowering his head and attacking the rim. I assume he’ll improve his jumper with time and reps at the next level as most young players do. I also just love big PG’s like him. A 6’7 pass-first PG who’s a great defender? Sign me up. I think he could be a really good player. If he really improves from 3, he could be nasty.
Fwiw, I think the Spurs are really high on Amen Thompson and see him as a 6’7 PG prospect as well. He’s likely going to Houston at 4, but if the Spurs were looking to trade back up, I feel like he might be their target.
As far as roster construction goes, Vic is the only player we should keep in mind as far as touches goes. Not Vassell or Johnson. And Vic DOES need someone to take touches from him. Basketball is played with four other teammates. You guys want to burn Vic out with all this talk about having no one else having a high usage but him. Someone else definitely should. And no one has established himself as that guy yet, so we need to keep pursuing those opportunities. Vassell may. Sochan may. But as of right now, no. Think of if Giannis never had help from guys like Middleton or Jrue. That would be a bad team.
If for some reason the Spurs have offers for either Scoot for Black with the basically the same package, it'd be really hard to see how they could not pick Scoot. You can let Scoot and Wemby figure each other out and have guys like Vassell/Johnson and Sochan fill in the cracks around them. Even if you think Henderson's ceiling is closer to a Tony Parker than a Tim Duncan, both guys played together just fine on the Spurs, along with a third HoFer and a cast of key supporting players. If you think Black has a chance at being a star, he's worth the trade. If you just think he's going to grow into a solid role-player, there are other ways of pursuing that, especially in the future when such a player becomes more valuable to the team.
We said pretty much the same thing seconds apart
You'd think that would be the case, but it rarely happens. In seven seasons, Cleveland couldn't lure any big name free agents to join a young generational talent in Lebron, and no one has gone to Milwaukee or Dallas to team up with Giannis or Doncic. I think there's an ego thing at play in these situations that limits how frequently they play out.
Yep, and to my eye, there's a real chance Thompson is on the board at five when either Detroit or Portland (if Detroit moves up for Miller) are on the clock, and I don't think either team would see him as someone they need on their roster. That could be the team's best chance at snagging him. Houston may get him, but they could also get Whitmore.
We don’t need a ball dominant, high usage point guard. I think the formula we want is what the Bucks are doing. I don’t think Wemby will be quite the facilitator Giannis is, at least not now. But they don’t have a pg who pounds the air out of the ball. Black, like Holiday, projects to be a very good defender who can switch and guard 2s and some 3s in a pinch. He’s also a good passer, high iq player on offense. Blacks 3pt efficiency is his blemish but his form is fine and he should get better with time.
if we didn’t have wemby, black wouldn’t be as good a fit because he’s not some electric shot generator/penetrator. But he’s definitely good enough to run an offense that has a built in scorer
I don't disagree with what you're saying. If Scoot was available at the same price I would say move on him. But he won't be and the difference between moving to 9 and moving to 3 would be huge. The question is (and only the Spurs really know) is do they value Scoot enough to give up what it would take to move up and get him? We certainly have the assets with 7FRP and 7SRP in the next three years (pending conveying). But would you be comfortable giving up the potential 4 FRP's, pick swaps, and young player it would potentially take to pull it off?
I like your thought process, but there's no world in which the same basic package gets these guys. Moving up to 9 or 10 is light-years different than moving up to 2 or 3
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
