Reaction: Spurs Trade the 33rd Pick, Draft Sidy Cissoko at 44

[LeBowen]

Both G-League Ignite guys fell hard -- Leonard Miller and Sidy Cissoko. That is, other than Scoot. I really wonder what the league thoughts about Ignite are right now. Players coming out of there have not been ready or very good at all.

Yeah, I think that eventually something will have to be done about domestic compe ions and player development.
College and Ignite are nowhere near European leagues and as we've seen over the past years international players are way more ready for the NBA in most cases.

Kids in the current domestic system aren't taught to play actual basketball, but to dominate their physically inferior peers.
Obviously, that's always been a thing, but with most good prospects being one and done, NCAA has become a joke if we talk actual level of compe ion.

There were way too many athletic guards and wings that have shooting as their biggest flaw in this draft.

But NCAA makes generates too much revenue to ever be fundamentally changed.

[Uriel]

What's noteworthy is the timing of the 33rd pick trade: Woj announced the trade while the draft was at pick #28. I don't agree with the idea that Spurs trade #33 because they knew there will still be good players at #44. There are just too much picks between #28 and #44 to have that kind of reasoning. The benefice of that move was also not worth the risk since they only got a couple of second round picks, that they don't need, for #33.To me, Spurs trade #33 simply because they didn't like the players available at that stage of the draft. Once they saw nothing special happened in the draft (trade opportunity or a player sliding) , they did their plan A and trade the pick. What happened at #44 is likely a combination of bad trade offers and Cissoko being unexpectedly available. It looks like an opportunity pick.

[Uriel]

What's noteworthy is the timing of the 33rd pick trade: Woj announced the trade while the draft was at pick #28.

I don't agree with the idea that Spurs trade #33 because they knew there will still be good players at #44. There are just too much picks between #28 and #44 to have that kind of reasoning. The benefice of that move was also not worth the risk since they only got a couple of second round picks, that they don't need, for #33.

To me, Spurs trade #33 simply because they didn't like the players available at that stage of the draft. Once they saw nothing special happened in the draft (trade opportunity or a player sliding) , they did their plan A and trade the pick.
What happened at #44 is likely a combination of bad trade offers and Cissoko being unexpectedly available. It looks like an opportunity pick.

My guess is their Plan A was to trade future first rounders to get into the lottery and pick either Black or Bufkin. That didn’t happen.

Plan B was to hope Ben Sheppard fell to 33. That didn’t happen.

So when Minnesota offered the deal for two future second round picks, they gambled that there were enough decent prospects left on the board that they could get one of them at 44 and not have to get them at 33. So that’s what they did.

[DPG21920]

I’m so annoyed at this trade . Still a great night

[DPG21920]

I think Bruno nailed the logic. The return SA got for 33 was no where near enough to gamble on players they liked still being there. It was such a meh package that it looked like they hated players left in this draft at the time

[Mr. Body]

Yeah, I think that eventually something will have to be done about domestic compe ions and player development.
College and Ignite are nowhere near European leagues and as we've seen over the past years international players are way more ready for the NBA in most cases.

Kids in the current domestic system aren't taught to play actual basketball, but to dominate their physically inferior peers.
Obviously, that's always been a thing, but with most good prospects being one and done, NCAA has become a joke if we talk actual level of compe ion.

There were way too many athletic guards and wings that have shooting as their biggest flaw in this draft.

But NCAA makes generates too much revenue to ever be fundamentally changed.

Agree with everything about a problem with US basketball. I disagree that the problem is the NCAA. I think the problem is the AAU travel circuit, basketball academies, and Ignite and OTE is the next step in this problem. The way the NBA has developed into a one-note, monotonous three-point barrage game contributes.

But it's the AAU system that is creating the problem. The type of basketball is hero-ball oriented, stare-down defenses and isolation heavy. There is very little emphasis on playmaking, seeing the floor, and problem solving in a team-oriented situation. (These are things NCAA at least does somewhat.) American players are good at doing a very basic set of things extremely well over and over. Outside of those situations, they're terrible. Jayson Tatum is perhaps the poster child. He's almost unstoppable. Then, when he can't score individually on his own, he's useless. You see it in international play -- he sucks. The NBA protracts the problem by giving stars tons of free points by way of free throws, too.

[Mr. Body]

My guess is their Plan A was to trade future first rounders to get into the lottery and pick either Black or Bufkin. That didn’t happen.

Plan B was to hope Ben Sheppard fell to 33. That didn’t happen.

So when Minnesota offered the deal for two future second round picks, they gambled that there were enough decent prospects left on the board that they could get one of them at 44 and not have to get them at 33. So that’s what they did.

I think the trade happened before the end of the first round. So maybe they passed once Slawther was gone. Or they just liked getting the two extra seconds.

[timvp]

While I agree that the Spurs were probably not confident there would be good players at 44, I did say well before the draft that 33 was the most likely pick to be traded. Anyone drafted at 33 was going to be part of the roster crunch, whereas at 44, they'd be in line for a two-way deal. Now, it's not clear where Cissoko is going to be after Rice's signing. But I don't think plan A for 44 was to trade that pick too. I think if anything their plan was to draft someone like Rice and use a two-way on him, but when they saw Cissoko was still available, they went ahead and drafted him instead with the possibility of him being on the roster.

I remember your posts about the Spurs being more likely to trade 33 than 44. Good call and very astute

Yeah, I think I key part of this trade is the contract expectation difference at 33 and 44. At 33, a second round pick is expecting guaranteed money and usually multiple years of guaranteed money. Leonard Miller probably gets a couple guaranteed years after being drafted at 33.

At 44, that's in the range where you either get an unguaranteed contract or a two-way contract. It's only 11 spots in the draft but the contracts given at the point of the draft are totally different.

It'll be interesting to see what kind of contract Cissoko gets. If he gets a two-way contract (which is obviously not as clear now with Rice in the mix), I think Cissoko at 44 would be a damn good pick. There's also a chance that the Spurs will wait to see how Cissoko does in summer league. If he plays well, the Spurs may give him guaranteed money if they're able to control him for multiple years.

[spurraider21]

i dont understand this roster crunch talk. we have 10 guys currently signed. wemby makes 11

with graham/wesley under contract, we already were going to sign at least one additional point guard. it was the spurs choice if they want to run it back with Tre, move back up to draft a viable PG who was available in the mid teens like Bufkin or Hood-Schifino, or go and overpay someone like Vanvleet just sot hey can hit the salary floor. Either way, that spot was going to be filled. this draft just presented a good opportunity to get a PG prospect that would be a good natural fit alongside wemby.

[Mr. Body]

i dont understand this roster crunch talk. we have 10 guys currently signed. wemby makes 11

with graham/wesley under contract, we already were going to sign at least one additional point guard. it was the spurs choice if they want to run it back with Tre, move back up to draft a viable PG who was available in the mid teens like Bufkin or Hood-Schifino, or go and overpay someone like Vanvleet just sot hey can hit the salary floor. Either way, that spot was going to be filled. this draft just presented a good opportunity to get a PG prospect that would be a good natural fit alongside wemby.

Has more to do with the roster going forward. This year seems more or less set. Next off-season presumably the team will have to make hard decisions on who to keep or move on, esp with possibly three FRPs, SRPs, and an increasing demand to upgrade key positions as we horn in on the playoffs.

[Seventyniner]

Has more to do with the roster going forward. This year seems more or less set. Next off-season presumably the team will have to make hard decisions on who to keep or move on, esp with possibly three FRPs, SRPs, and an increasing demand to upgrade key positions as we horn in on the playoffs.

It will definitely be harder next season, but it's not 100% that the Spurs will have three firsts in 2024. Charlotte would have to make the playoffs and Toronto would have to have their pick be outside the top 6.

2025 is when things can get crazy. If the Charlotte and Toronto picks don't convey next summer, the Spurs could have up to five firsts in 2025 depending on how CHA/TOR/CHI finish the season.

[spurraider21]

Has more to do with the roster going forward. This year seems more or less set. Next off-season presumably the team will have to make hard decisions on who to keep or move on, esp with possibly three FRPs, SRPs, and an increasing demand to upgrade key positions as we horn in on the playoffs.

the huge stash of picks we have going forward is exactly the reason our goal should have been to consolidate them and move back up. all we did is make it worse. we came into the draft with 3 picks. we left the draft with 2 selections and 2 ty future picks that are going to pale in value compared to the one we gave up

[Mr. Body]

the huge stash of picks we have going forward is exactly the reason our goal should have been to consolidate them and move back up. all we did is make it worse. we came into the draft with 3 picks. we left the draft with 2 selections and 2 ty future picks that are going to pale in value compared to the one we gave up

Well, I don't disagree, but apparently no deals could be made. If there's no one selling, there's nothing to buy.

Consolidating picks isn't the only option. You can trade picks for players. The team can flip picks forward, which I suspect will be a keen option going forward as the team starts moving into playoff pushes and getting talent starts getting harder.

[spurraider21]

Well, I don't disagree, but apparently no deals could be made. If there's no one selling, there's nothing to buy.

Consolidating picks isn't the only option. You can trade picks for players. The team can flip picks forward, which I suspect will be a keen option going forward as the team starts moving into playoff pushes and getting talent starts getting harder.

teams were buying and selling in the teens, in the 20's, in the 30's, etc

[spurraider21]

teams were buying and selling in the teens, in the 20's, in the 30's, etc

the mavs and thunder swapped from 10 to 12 in exchange for the bertans contract

the mavs bought the #24 overall pick just for taking on the richaun holmes contract.

the celtics traded the #25 pick for #31 and 2 future second rounders

the celtics then traded the #31 pick for 2 second rounders

the wizards traded #35 for additional second rounders

orlando traded #36 for a 2030 second rounder + cash

[Arcadian]

how quickly the forum turned dark again

[spurraider21]

how quickly the forum turned dark again

i mean, since the day of the lottery, we've all been crazy excited about the future of the team. from that moment, we knew wemby was happening and generally speaking, all is well.

yesterday was about the non-wemby stuff, hence the disappointment. obviously if you look back at how we did in the draft as far as talent acquisition, we did better than the rest of the league by a long shot

[Mr. Body]

the mavs and thunder swapped from 10 to 12 in exchange for the bertans contract

the mavs bought the #24 overall pick just for taking on the richaun holmes contract.

the celtics traded the #25 pick for #31 and 2 future second rounders

the celtics then traded the #31 pick for 2 second rounders

the wizards traded #35 for additional second rounders

orlando traded #36 for a 2030 second rounder + cash

Thanks for the list.

The only one that applies, IMO, is the first one. But if it was Toronto going from 13 over OKC to get Cason Wallace, the Spurs didn't have a late lotto pick to work with.

The rest are just not in areas, IMO, where any player appealed to them. Only supposing: the Spurs wanted Black, Bufkin, or Wallace. They're all gone at that point. Taking on Holmes to get O-Max was brilliant, but maybe the Spurs no longer valued anybody at that point vis-a-vis their roster, etc. Maybe, like the 33, they didn't want to take a marginal player on a guaranteed contract.

Also, there's no Discord channel where GMs post opportunities (I don't think). The picks come so fast over a shifting landscape. These guys go with relationships and one-to-one communication. It's not like SAC blasted the group that they wanted off of Holmes. Same as the sale of Duren last year. DAL and SAC had some previous relationship or SAC saw that DAL suddenly had a big, new trade exception, so asked about dumping a contract.

[Obstructed_View]

Yeah, I think that eventually something will have to be done about domestic compe ions and player development.
College and Ignite are nowhere near European leagues and as we've seen over the past years international players are way more ready for the NBA in most cases.

Kids in the current domestic system aren't taught to play actual basketball, but to dominate their physically inferior peers.
Obviously, that's always been a thing, but with most good prospects being one and done, NCAA has become a joke if we talk actual level of compe ion.

There were way too many athletic guards and wings that have shooting as their biggest flaw in this draft.

But NCAA makes generates too much revenue to ever be fundamentally changed.

It's relatively new. It will be refined and more kids will be drawn to it. As fans gravitate towards it team success will start to become more important.

As you suggest, it will forever be primarily a development league, bit I think it's a good idea and will improve with time.

[spurraider21]

Thanks for the list.

The only one that applies, IMO, is the first one. But if it was Toronto going from 13 over OKC to get Cason Wallace, the Spurs didn't have a late lotto pick to work with.

The rest are just not in areas, IMO, where any player appealed to them. Only supposing: the Spurs wanted Black, Bufkin, or Wallace. They're all gone at that point. Taking on Holmes to get O-Max was brilliant, but maybe the Spurs no longer valued anybody at that point vis-a-vis their roster, etc. Maybe, like the 33, they didn't want to take a marginal player on a guaranteed contract.

Also, there's no Discord channel where GMs post opportunities (I don't think). The picks come so fast over a shifting landscape. These guys go with relationships and one-to-one communication. It's not like SAC blasted the group that they wanted off of Holmes. Same as the sale of Duren last year. DAL and SAC had some previous relationship or SAC saw that DAL suddenly had a big, new trade exception, so asked about dumping a contract.

nah. prudent teams are having these conversations in advance of the draft to establish frameworks of the deal, and obviously the deal will or wont consummate depending on whether the player in interest is actually available at that spot

[Chinook]

i dont understand this roster crunch talk. we have 10 guys currently signed. wemby makes 11

with graham/wesley under contract, we already were going to sign at least one additional point guard. it was the spurs choice if they want to run it back with Tre, move back up to draft a viable PG who was available in the mid teens like Bufkin or Hood-Schifino, or go and overpay someone like Vanvleet just sot hey can hit the salary floor. Either way, that spot was going to be filled. this draft just presented a good opportunity to get a PG prospect that would be a good natural fit alongside wemby.

I think they should've moved up too. But there's a difference between earmarking a spot for a PG prospect picked in the middle of the first that you believe in and just whoever is there at 33. You may have wanted a guy picked there over Champ, Mamu, KBD or whomever, but that doesn't mean the Spurs do. In the very least they probably don't want to eat multiple years of guaranteed money if whomever they took at 33 doesn't beat out one of those other guys.

They need to get rid of picks and shouldn't wait until the draft they're due to try to accomplish that. But that's in large part because they aren't going to want a bunch of guys picked 25th or later to sort through every year. This year is proof of that, not evidence against it.

[Budkin]

We got wemby! Everything else is gravy

This tbh

[Mr. Body]

nah. prudent teams are having these conversations in advance of the draft to establish frameworks of the deal, and obviously the deal will or wont consummate depending on whether the player in interest is actually available at that spot

The two trades I mentioned -- Duren last year and Dallas suddenly having a big trade exception -- were not opportunities that existed before the draft started.

It's impossible to game out every single scenario. Anyway, if the Spurs didn't want someone at 33, why would they have wanted the same tier of player at 24?

[spurraider21]

I think they should've moved up too. But there's a difference between earmarking a spot for a PG prospect picked in the middle of the first that you believe in and just whoever is there at 33. You may have wanted a guy picked there over Champ, Mamu, KBD or whomever, but that doesn't mean the Spurs do. In the very least they probably don't want to eat multiple years of guaranteed money if whomever they took at 33 doesn't beat out one of those other guys.

They need to get rid of picks and shouldn't wait until the draft they're due to try to accomplish that. But that's in large part because they aren't going to want a bunch of guys picked 25th or later to sort through every year. This year is proof of that, not evidence against it.

yeah im not suggesting they should have taken a guy just for the sake of taking a guy. but if they had reason to believe they wouldnt like guys in the 33 range, the at ude should have been to be more aggressive, maybe even more than they wanted to, to move up to secure a guy they ARE interested, as opposed to just compiling even more useless picks

[spurraider21]

The two trades I mentioned -- Duren last year and Dallas suddenly having a big trade exception -- were not opportunities that existed before the draft started.

It's impossible to game out every single scenario. Anyway, if the Spurs didn't want someone at 33, why would they have wanted the same tier of player at 24?

Dallas acquired the trade exception on draft day, and i would venture to guess they didnt only have that conversation during the 3 minutes that dallas was on the clock. im sure OKC was cognizant of the cap ramifications of bertans because they had conversations in advance of the draft.

you have these convos and establish trade frameworks ahead of time, and then the trades either do or dont happen depending on whether targeted players are available or not