Houston is an interesting case. Jabari seems to be on the verge of taking a pretty big leap, and (to my surprise) Amen Thompson looked legit. That plus Sengun, Tari Eason, and the new vets plus coaching, they should have enough to fight for the play in at least.
With Detroit it's not so clear to me. There is a senseless ac ulation of overlapping talent and a lack of purpose. Monty Williams is a good addition, but they have to get Cade back and make a few moves before taking a step forward.
OKC is clearly way ahead of all the young teams, they should make the playoffs and, if Presti is willing to draw from the war chest of picks to get some vet support, they're not far from a deep playoff run.
what we saw is a tanking team with Pop ignoring defense and throwing funky lineups in the 4th and spurs DNP'ing their best players for long stretches anytime they were making two shots in row not to hurt the tanking effort. Players also knew they were tanking and weren't leaving it all out on the court in close games.
Houston isn't a team, they're a collection of players, most of whom are NOT team oriented guys.
Houston had 2 main problems: 1) no direction (leadership, game plan, accountability) 2) horrible backcourt (selfish and stupid chuckers)
They've addressed those 2 main concerns. They're not a contender by any stretch of the imagination, but to think they're in the same place they were last year is foolish.
A. Bleacher report is stupid.
2. Any young core with Victor in it is automatically number one. I am super excited about our core to the point of being homerish about it and I understand that reality.
Wemby --> the Franchise
Vassell --> at the very least, a high end 3 and D wing.
Sochan --> all-NBA defensive caliber guy that can work as a secondary playmaker on offense
That's the real core going forward that we need to build around.
PG:
SG: Vassell
SF:
PF: Sochan
C: Wembanyama
The best scenario would be to complete those other 2 spots with:
-An dinamic, all-star level PG that can get his own and playmake for others. A 20/25 pts, 7/10 assists guy.
-A 6'8" ish 3 and D SF.
Current guys I could see sticking around for bench/role playing roles:
-Champagnie definitely if his current play is his norm.
-And one of Collins, Bassey and Barlow as Wemby's replacement.
I just don't see how Keldon and Tre fit in the long run. They MIGHT have a role in the bench but their next contracts could prove too expensive for such roles, specially Keldon's.
The Spurs seem committed to starting Collins next to Victor. The other spots may boil down to who can defend those positions.
That said, I saw some report that Graham realizes how good Wemby will make his game and he's working his ass off to make the rotation.
I've also stated before that I wouldn't be surprised if Victor and McDermott score so many points together that Pop shakes up the roster to maximize their time together.
I want to see how Keldon does with a reduced role before I pass judgment. Tre just feels like a guy set to run the second unit, not necessarily the guy at point. That said, no one on the current roster beats Tre out of the starting 1 spot.
How some of the other guys fit and how this team evolves will be fascinating. Pop basically got last year off as the Spurs weren't trying to win. He probably worked harder assuring lineups that could lose than he did trying to win. Seeing him re-focus and seeing the team set on winning will be awesome to watch. I do know Keldon is a scrapper and this could be a great chance for him to not be the focus and contribute to the greater good. I could see the Spurs make a move by the deadline if they're doing better than expected.
It's going to be fun!
Sure, and I don't mind that for his rookie season. I was talking more about 2, 3 years down the road. There's no doubt in my mind Wemby and Sochan will be the starting frontcourt duo of the future.
Not endorsing that part which is why I said I disagreed with him on the thread topic but also I worded it like so I can see why you think I did endorse it.
“I wouldn’t have posted it”
This is the issue. Of course I wouldn’t have. Maybe someone else would. Who cares? Why is there such a stupid divide among people who visit the same forum and follow the same team? There’s this ridiculous notion that we’re so different, but in reality we’re all one community here with the same interest. Why is the hate for other people so great for some folks that they can’t help but let their experience on this forum revolve other people’s opinions? Are people so unoriginal?
I'm speaking to bias, not hate.
I see your point. Toronto and Chicago look like middling to bad teams in the near future, which is perfect given the protections the picks have.
For most teams sooner picks are more valuable than later. Perhaps the Spurs could get a team to give up a 1-4/1-4/1-4 protected pick later on for one of the Chicago/Toronto picks.
I still wouldn't do it for the TOR pick, *maybe* the CHI pick. The TOR pick is valuable because it is so immediate and we have as good of a feeling as possible without the season actually starting of whether it will finish in the money immediately. The Chicago pick is a little more iffy, and in fact I'm slightly concerned that it won't convey in 2025 (which actually might end up a good thing if it can land us the #9 or 10 pick in a subsequent year).
We could use the same model Ariel put together to value pick swaps to estimate the EV of a far out protected 1-4 and compare against your "gut" expectations for where the TOR pick will fall this year (my gut says somewhere between 7 and 14). Even though the protections would be better on a 1-4 pick in the future, you have a risk of that team being better in the future than TOR will be next season.
I actually like many of the Rockets picks (Sengun, Eason, Amen, and liked all of them as prospects) but a young core is still bound to its organization and Houston ownership is a disaster and has sped up their process too fast in my opinion, and in a way that seems dumb in some ways, but at least it’s a step towards competing. But doesn’t mean I’m a Rocket fan. I love Victor and Sochan and excited to see who steps up and who gets shipped out. Victor plus Pop and stable ownership is a great starting point, which is better than most cores. Anyway. Just rambling.
You consider FVV and Brooks to be leaders? Wow.
Honestly never bothered to confirm about his position. I think he doesn't have a trade clause.
Yeah you're probably thinking right by not jumping at the first FA you see but Dame is not just another guy either. Of course timelines are a real thing but not the only thing. In my view, seeking a big FA right now would be the thing to do.
Let's say we do get someone like Dame. Let's say it works like I say. At that point you give more weight to timelines and possibly make decisions off that. That's what SA did when they were winning. Everything is a little better when you're winning.
Yeah, I'm extending it beyond unrestricted 2 way swaps with uniform outcome distribution: n-way with arbitrary restrictions -direct order, swap with "the lesser" or "better of" wording-, arbitrary outcome distributions for every team involved, picks with varying protections through time, etc. I'll probably get to it on the weekend and I'll post it here, maybe we can do a power ranking, it'd be interesting to figure out how we compare to OKC, Utah, and the like. Just have a little patience
I consider IME to the the leader, and Van Vleet will be his lieutenant. Brooks is a headache, best case he's a soldier, worst case he's the enemy within. But anyway I don't see how anyone can argue they're not improved, regardless of whether the money they paid was justified or not (I think you can make a case for VanVleet's contract, but Brook's is hideous).
You need to put together an analytics blogs for some of this stuff man! Golden.Yeah, I'm extending it beyond unrestricted 2 way swaps with uniform outcome distribution: n-way with arbitrary restrictions -direct order, swap with "the lesser" or "better of" wording-, arbitrary outcome distributions for every team involved, picks with varying protections through time, etc. I'll probably get to it on the weekend and I'll post it here, maybe we can do a power ranking, it'd be interesting to figure out how we compare to OKC, Utah, and the like. Just have a little patience
I'm not positive Branham cracks the rotation, even before his offensive struggles the last few days.
So who is this re they have coaching this team? He's really bad.
Gregg with 2 g's.
But he's won 5 les you know.
With the number of young prospects the spurs have, they’d be going close to the tax with extensions just with our own players in a few years. Why would anyone want to add $60m/yr to this and force the team to give up good young talent.
Lillard is a decent player, but is exactly the type of players that leads a team to mediocrity through cap bell. Good enough to get a max deal, not good enough to win you a le or even lead you deep in the playoffs
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote