Complementing the Wemby Show

[JeffDuncan]

That’s only if you view players as the only assets in a trade. …

Let me know when you see a piece of paper score 20 points in an NBA game.

The players are the only reason all that other stuff even exists.

If you don’t understand it’s all about players, you don’t understand anything.

Because if you aren’t going to accrue assets, you damn well not be spending them on short term pieces.

You’d rather have a file of paper than a decent point guard for this current Spurs team, you say? Is that right?

[exstatic]

You can tank constuctively

No you can’t. You do things to lose games. There is nothing constructive about that. Anything constructive works against the tank.

[Pauleta14]

I disagree, You can play on the PT, game played or rotations to tank smartly

What's happening is pathetic, very little positive and a lot of unnecessary handicaps

[z0sa]

I disagree, You can play on the PT, game played or rotations to tank smartly

What's happening is pathetic, very little positive and a lot of unnecessary handicaps

That's the real issue if we want to talk tank. Tank and developmental seasons don't have to be mutually exclusive at all.

[spurraider21]

You’ve obviously never seen a gleague game.

We all saw 82 gleague games last season

[stnick2261]

The problem with the original Spurs dynasty was the fact that they didn't have the assets to reload after they started winning. The draft is designed so bad teams get the best players (to stop dynasties and increase parity in the league). When the Spurs were consistently the best team in the league, they were drafting around #30 every year. Not only that, they didn't even have a 1st round draft pick every year because of some bad decisions. In order for us to get rid of Richard Jefferson, we had to include our 2012 1st round pick. That draft had Draymond Green and Khris Middleton still on the board at that pick.

In 2005 (in the middle of our dynasty) we traded Malik Rose and 2 first round picks for 103 game rental of Nazr Mohammed. Those 2 picks were #30 in 2005 (David Lee) and #29 in 2006 (Paul Millsap was available).

Once we are done with our tanking, you are going to want the Spurs to have other team's draft picks in our basket of assets. You need to re-load with players that aren't necessarily remaining at pick 30. Pick swaps are also wonderful when your pick is #30 (even if it only gives you a few spots).

2013, our pick was #28. We drafted LJC right after Rudy Gobert (#27)
2017, our pick was #29. We drafted Derrick White. Jarrett Allen went #22 and OG Anunoby went #23
2018, our pick was #18. We drafted Lonnie Walker IV. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander went #11

[z0sa]

The problem with the original Spurs dynasty was the fact that they didn't have the assets to reload after they started winning. The draft is designed so bad teams get the best players (to stop dynasties and increase parity in the league). When the Spurs were consistently the best team in the league, they were drafting around #30 every year. Not only that, they didn't even have a 1st round draft pick every year because of some bad decisions. In order for us to get rid of Richard Jefferson, we had to include our 2012 1st round pick. That draft had Draymond Green and Khris Middleton still on the board at that pick.

In 2005 (in the middle of our dynasty) we traded Malik Rose and 2 first round picks for 103 game rental of Nazr Mohammed. Those 2 picks were #30 in 2005 (David Lee) and #29 in 2006 (Paul Millsap was available).

Once we are done with our tanking, you are going to want the Spurs to have other team's draft picks in our basket of assets. You need to re-load with players that aren't necessarily remaining at pick 30. Pick swaps are also wonderful when your pick is #30 (even if it only gives you a few spots).

2013, our pick was #28. We drafted LJC right after Rudy Gobert (#27)
2017, our pick was #29. We drafted Derrick White. Jarrett Allen went #22 and OG Anunoby went #23
2018, our pick was #18. We drafted Lonnie Walker IV. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander went #11

I'm more concerned about what our current roster does for Wemby rather than speculating too much about potential trades, but I really like what you've written up. That said, I can't say I agree. I feel like we've got the right pieces (including picks) to make moves - we should do so. 3 main reasons:

1, expecting another Duncan-esque dynasty is too much even for Wemby. I'm not saying I don't want that - , I hope it does happen. But I'd be happy with just one more LOB. Thus between hoarding picks and trying to over-develop rather than make win-now moves over the next couple seasons utilizing those picks (if necessary), I personally would greatly prefer the latter option.

2, If our window of contention peters out after only 5-7 years, the good news is Wemby's young enough that you could ride the lottery again and he'd still be <30 and healthy, most likely. (always assuming health!)

3, If we DON'T assume health, as could definitely be the case for a freak of nature like Wemby, then over-developing and relying too much on the long game could cost us our entire championship window entirely.

That said, I agree the Spurs do appear to be playing the long game and hoping to draft and develop again a la Tony and Manu. But both were late picks in their respective rounds, so really how important are those high picks in the end? It'd be interesting to see if the Spurs picks from the Duncan era (Manu/Tony/Kawhi) were flashes in the pan from the FO standpoint and they truly just got lucky and/or were so far ahead of the curve on Europeans (for TP/Manu) they really were no-brainers.

Edit: Manu obv isn't european but he played euroball before CoM crucifies me