Reply With Quote
why would they want that chump?
why would they want that chump?
I know you are, I'm saying I don't think those differences are very relevant for practical purposes. You're overthinking this.
think he wants the FRP. lonzo is the means to the end
Tbh, the Spurs probably never make that 2030 pick. Before then, it'll likely be used in a star-hunting trade to get more talent around Wemby. And when star-hunting, that asset will hold a ton of value. That's one of the rare assets that's actually more valuable than a regular unprotected first.
So if you buy a Google stock for $1 you could lose $1. Yay.
I mean the spurs could definitely contribute expiring contracts for Portland
Doubt it means anything either way. This was just a no-brainer of a deal that the Spurs had to do. This type of low-risk, high-reward trade rarely comes along.
The Spurs got lucky because the Mavs are desperate to put talent around Luka and the Celtics were looking at losing Grant Williams for nothing.
I’m trying to think though how best to maximize all these expirings, and it seems like one of the best ways is to take back a contract with money into next season. Lonzo Ball is one, his injury situation is unfortunate, and he’s on a team facing cap challenges if they decide to extend DDR after doubling down on Vuc.
Duncan Robinson is another candidate but I assume MIA will deplete its draft stores in the Dame trade.
I think you could get to a range of values of how much an unprotected swap is worth. Possible Luka is is good that even with only a mediocre supporting cast, they're good enough to be a middling playoff team and be decent. Or Luka leaves. Or We're bad that year cause of injuries.
On the swap vs protected pick idea: Preference ordering varies by team. For instance, I'd rather have swap rights than a protected pick from Charlotte, I'd rather have a protected pick than the Boston Swap in 2028, as Boston is likely still going to be good then with the Jays. Dallas in 2030, I think I'd rather have an unprotected pick Swap than (for instance) a top 20 protected pick, as you get much more possible upside, and the Mavs haven't been a gold standard franchise recently.
I do acknowledge there's a chance this is worth nothing - We could have an injury run ala GS that led to Wiseman, and the swap rights are worthless. Still think it's good thinking.
The reward the Spurs could have reaped from any Lillard or Harden trade was unlikely to be higher than this one, because likely we'd have played a similar or smaller role, plus Miami doesn't have the assets to pay Portland let alone anyone else.
Spurs seem allergic to taking on salary beyond a single season, at least so far.
Exactly. Lillard was never coming to SA, but if Spurs DO want to get involved in a multi-team trade they still have a boatload of picks, and some other pieces they could easily stand to move (namely McD and Graham) to get some better draft compensation
Agree there! But holistically like Cedi trade too. That was such a meh deal and thankfully Sa proved it was not just money and did this deal with Dallas too - but do these players and contracts make it any more or less likely? I’d say losing cap spade hurts probably right? Being able to flat out absorb money is big as a third team and can’t do that now
Maybe the Mavs asked us for 4 seconds for the frp swap + bullock and then rerouted 2 of them to Boston?Aaaahhhh.
Okay, nevermind all the crap I've been saying. Now I'm not sure why we sent two seconds to Boston.
You lost me at the end. How is it more valuable than an unprotected first?! With unprotected first you get the same pick as you would with a swap but keep your own too. What angle am I missing here?
Kawhi said he was a Spur for life once.
yeah still possible they aint done
It's not simply the difference you're emphasizing. There are big practical differences. The Spurs cannot trade a swap to another team like they could with a pick. If the Spurs had swaps with Charlotte, Toronto, Atlanta and Chicago instead of their picks, they'd have significantly less draft currency to trade. They'd have to trade their own picks, and if they protected those picks, then they'd be tied to the Stepien rule. Having those separate picks allows for the team to make mid-sized trades while still having the ability to make all-in trades. It also gives them more bites at the apple and a ton more draft-day flexibility.
Swaps are not the same as draft picks, and they don't have the same value. That's why Dallas made the trade. They aren't stupid. This trade increased their ability to make future deals. They can still trade future swap rights to the pick they have in 2030. The Spurs are stupid either. They created a third "double pick" to make an all-in trade easier. But I don't think for a second that Dallas would've been anywhere near as fine to give up their 2027 pick, even in a one-and-done scenario like LAL did. They need to keep that flexibility. Gold standard or not, a swap isn't worth the same to a team in Dallas' position.
It's so far out don't even know if Dallas will be worse than the Spurs at that time.
Wemby can be out of the league by then with injuries. We don't know that far out.
But the Spurs had too many 2nds so it's worth the gamble that the Spurs will be better by 2030.
Our unprotected 2030 + the swap > our 2030 unprotected alone
Low-risk, high reward gamble.
If the Spurs do happen to suck, we just don't do the swap.
If Dallas loses Luka and decides to go tank mode, that swap will be like gold (or at the very least, hamstrings their possibilities)
If both are in the middle, well no harm no foul.
An unprotected first is more valuable as the Spurs would still keep their pick so they would have two first round picks.
Hes not talking about Dallas's 1st vs the swap...hes talking about trading our 2030 pick....Our unprotected 2030 + the swap > our 2030 unprotected alone
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
