Call Your Ideal Off-Season

[Chinook]

So what's the ideal draft for people? I'm starting to wonder if it would be Risacher/Castle.

I'm not the biggest Zach fan, but he's the only SF prospect who looks like he could be the three-and-D pivot (though I guess he'd be an alero) that would let the starting unit work. Then Castle to come off the bench with Monk with Johnson, the best PF the RE can buy and Collins rounding out the bench. That's probably not impossible, but it is unlikely. I wonder how a Castle/Salaun draft would look. That seems significantly more doable. I'm not as in love with Salaun as some folks are, but he has the size to be a backup PF by mid-season. Ideally some vet is willing to come in and be compe ion for him, but the starting SF hole would require more immediate use of resources

The question becomes, what do you do in the off-season after that? RGM was briefly obsessed with a Garland/Vassell trade. Literally no Spurs fan agreed with it, so the talk shifted to Johnson/Jones/picks. I personally don't think Garland makes sense, but let's build something around that.

Draft-Day Trade:

Spurs trade Jones, Johnson, Wesley, 8, CHA25 and ATL25 to CLE for Garland and 20.
Spurs trade Graham, second(s) and the cash to cover his guaranteed salary to Detroit for a fake second

Draft:

At 4, the Spurs select Castle
At 20, the Spurs select Klintman
At 35, the Spurs select Mitc
At 48, the Spurs select Mogbo (two-way)

Free Agency:

The Spurs would enter the summer with just shy of $25 Million in cap space and the RE to fill three spots.

I'll make some people's days and have all that cap space to go Patrick Williams on a $106.8M/4 deal. Since this is an "ideal" off-season, Chicago just lets him go that contract. Otherwise, the Spurs would give the Bulls their 2025 pick back in return for them not matching. In that scenario, they could add Champangie to the deal to push the value up to $119.7M/4. But that's getting a bit crazy given everything going on with Williams. Just like with the Bulls pick, I'm going to assume that extra money isn't needed.

With the room exception, the Spurs sign Keenan Evans from Europe. I have no idea what the exchange rate is between the leagues right now. Maybe the RE isn't enough. Maybe a min deal is good enough. But he does seem like a pretty typical sixth man, especially if that 6-3 height listing is without shoes.

Finally, to wrap things up, the Spurs bring back Barlow for one last year, with his versatility allowing him to offer depth at PF and center.

Below is the roster after all this plays out:


Garland, Castle, Evans
Vassell, Branham, Mitc
Williams, Champangie, Cissoko
Sochan, Klintman, Barlow
Wembanyama, Collins, Bassey

TW: Mogbo and two other prospects picked up off the heap

(additions to the main roster in bold)

Thoughts: The bench is extremely worrisome in this scenario. Maybe Evans and Mitc provide immediate dividends, and the second unit is Evans, Mitc , Castle, Champangie, Collins. But this once again highlights the issues with trading Johnson in this types of deal. The sixth-man market has inflated even faster than the salary cap has. Even the full MLE isn't enough for most of those guys. Finding even just a good rotation player for the room exception is asking a lot. Evans looks to be more of a combo-guard in a bad way. He has respectable assist numbers, but he's more of a gunner than a creator. He can put vertical pressure on a defense, though, which is something that's not the case for the current guards.

But obviously the real heart of this off-season would be to create a Garland/Vassell/Wembanyama Big Three with Sochan and Williams supporting. I don't like the Garland fit, though I've been told that Darius is a good PnR player who'd improve beyond his All-Star status with a guy like Wemby to pass to. Perhaps with these three, the Spurs wouldn't need to worry about their bench much. But knowing how Pop does rotations, I think sixth man is still important. Considering what the Spurs will have paid to make this happen, I don't feel like they're even dark-horse contenders. Maybe in after two years of this core, they would be. But by then Sochan would be a free agent. After these moves, the Spurs would be $17.3 Million over the cap. They'd still be well under the tax, but they'd lose the benefit of having mostly flat or declining contracts and instead take Garland's, Williams' and Evans' raises. This means the Spurs could end up being a tax team after re-signing Sochan and making more draft picks.

There are worse scenarios out there, but I'd prefer a more conservative approach to rebuilding for the next couple of years.

[scott]

Thanks for the thought-provoking scenario (per usual), Chinook.

You make a real important point about this scenario, that is a common thread with most scenarios: almost all of them leave us with considerable bench weakness. This is a reflection of the relatively subpar level of talent on the team today and something I think we need to live with as a place to improve over time. We might just have to get used to the idea of a bench unit who will frustrate us and maybe even cost us some Ws next year. There seems to be a broad consensus from a lot of people on the board (and I'm in this camp) that play-in should be the target for 2024-25. If that is the case, then you can look to next year's draft to fill out the depth of the team (either by being bench contributors directly or pushing someone else to the bench).

With that said, it also does highlight the potential perils of tying up all your cap flexibility with someone like Garland this season. I'd much rather than go to a deal like Dejounte's which is a little more manageable or Lauri if you can find a way to use the capspace to fill out the roster next year and then resign him with bird rights. (I recognize you don't see Lauri as a fit, but that's where we have a firm difference of opinion).

[TD 21]

1. The bench already sucks.
2. Everything doesn't have to be solved at once. Of course that team wouldn't have championship upside. The goal would be to have a baseline of good enough young, complementary talent to at least push for the play-in next season.
3. They'd still have surplus premium picks to hopefully luck into a better second best player than Garland, but at least they'd buy themselves more time to find it.

[Chinook]

The concern for me isn't really about the cap space, at least for this year. This is one of the rare trades where the Spurs get a chance to use their cap space before doing the deal (though the trade between 8 and 20 does create some timing concerns that'd have to be worked out). I think the biggest thing that stands out to me is how it's much more important that the Spurs have a plan for small-forward than it is for them to upgrade the PG position. There are options in the draft for PGs, and Jones is a capable starter already. Even free agency has Monk who might be obtainable for the cap space the team has. But outside of Risacher, I don't know if there's a day-one starting SF. Knecht might be a starter offensively, but he'd be risky to depend on defensively. Buzelis and Holland have the talent, but their shooting would make it hard for them to fit at PF, let alone at SF next to Sochan. Shannon is more than talented enough, but ... you know. That's all why I'm pretty comfortable with the team drafting a PG and focusing more of their effort on getting that starting forward.

I don't agree the bench has to be a sore spot. Johnson is a good sixth man who just needs legit support. Expecting youngsters, projects and Collins to fill that out is questionable. If the Spurs draft a PG, that player will either start, pushing Jones to the bench to help there, or he will be part of the second unit. Castle may not improve the second-unit immediately, but he is a smart passer who might be able to unlock Collins and Champangie. If it's Dillingham, well then sixth man should be good enough for this season. Yes, if the Spurs make a big trade using Johnson, they may have to live with a bad bench. This thing is a process. But they can also live with not trading so much for one player right now and instead build a deep roster that can absorb the hit that comes with a potential star trade down the line. I think a play-in run built off a deep team lead by Wemby and Vassell would bode better for their long-term position than a similar run where the starters had to carry the load all night. Same place but much different paths forward.

[Knoxxx]

So what's the ideal draft for people? I'm starting to wonder if it would be Risacher/Castle.

I'm not the biggest Zach fan, but he's the only SF prospect who looks like he could be the three-and-D pivot (though I guess he'd be an alero) that would let the starting unit work. Then Castle to come off the bench with Monk with Johnson, the best PF the RE can buy and Collins rounding out the bench. That's probably not impossible, but it is unlikely. I wonder how a Castle/Salaun draft would look. That seems significantly more doable. I'm not as in love with Salaun as some folks are, but he has the size to be a backup PF by mid-season. Ideally some vet is willing to come in and be compe ion for him, but the starting SF hole would require more immediate use of resources

The question becomes, what do you do in the off-season after that? RGM was briefly obsessed with a Garland/Vassell trade. Literally no Spurs fan agreed with it, so the talk shifted to Johnson/Jones/picks. I personally don't think Garland makes sense, but let's build something around that.

Draft-Day Trade:

Spurs trade Jones, Johnson, Wesley, 8, CHA25 and ATL25 to CLE for Garland and 20.
Spurs trade Graham, second(s) and the cash to cover his guaranteed salary to Detroit for a fake second

Draft:

At 4, the Spurs select Castle
At 20, the Spurs select Klintman
At 35, the Spurs select Mitc
At 48, the Spurs select Mogbo (two-way)

Free Agency:

The Spurs would enter the summer with just shy of $25 Million in cap space and the RE to fill three spots.

I'll make some people's days and have all that cap space to go Patrick Williams on a $106.8M/4 deal. Since this is an "ideal" off-season, Chicago just lets him go that contract. Otherwise, the Spurs would give the Bulls their 2025 pick back in return for them not matching. In that scenario, they could add Champangie to the deal to push the value up to $119.7M/4. But that's getting a bit crazy given everything going on with Williams. Just like with the Bulls pick, I'm going to assume that extra money isn't needed.

With the room exception, the Spurs sign Keenan Evans from Europe. I have no idea what the exchange rate is between the leagues right now. Maybe the RE isn't enough. Maybe a min deal is good enough. But he does seem like a pretty typical sixth man, especially if that 6-3 height listing is without shoes.

Finally, to wrap things up, the Spurs bring back Barlow for one last year, with his versatility allowing him to offer depth at PF and center.

Below is the roster after all this plays out:


Garland, Castle, Evans
Vassell, Branham, Mitc
Williams, Champangie, Cissoko
Sochan, Klintman, Barlow
Wembanyama, Collins, Bassey

TW: Mogbo and two other prospects picked up off the heap

(additions to the main roster in bold)

Thoughts: The bench is extremely worrisome in this scenario. Maybe Evans and Mitc provide immediate dividends, and the second unit is Evans, Mitc , Castle, Champangie, Collins. But this once again highlights the issues with trading Johnson in this types of deal. The sixth-man market has inflated even faster than the salary cap has. Even the full MLE isn't enough for most of those guys. Finding even just a good rotation player for the room exception is asking a lot. Evans looks to be more of a combo-guard in a bad way. He has respectable assist numbers, but he's more of a gunner than a creator. He can put vertical pressure on a defense, though, which is something that's not the case for the current guards.

But obviously the real heart of this off-season would be to create a Garland/Vassell/Wembanyama Big Three with Sochan and Williams supporting. I don't like the Garland fit, though I've been told that Darius is a good PnR player who'd improve beyond his All-Star status with a guy like Wemby to pass to. Perhaps with these three, the Spurs wouldn't need to worry about their bench much. But knowing how Pop does rotations, I think sixth man is still important. Considering what the Spurs will have paid to make this happen, I don't feel like they're even dark-horse contenders. Maybe in after two years of this core, they would be. But by then Sochan would be a free agent. After these moves, the Spurs would be $17.3 Million over the cap. They'd still be well under the tax, but they'd lose the benefit of having mostly flat or declining contracts and instead take Garland's, Williams' and Evans' raises. This means the Spurs could end up being a tax team after re-signing Sochan and making more draft picks.

There are worse scenarios out there, but I'd prefer a more conservative approach to rebuilding for the next couple of years.

Edey at 20 and we could be in business!

[CGD]

Thanks for refocusing us.

I’m on record as wanting Garland. In my view this is the time to grab him while his value is at a nadir (for various reasons). Folks will cite the cost — fair— but when you go beyond the sticker shock and think about it as a % of the cap, it’s not unreasonable. This is happening when we’re still in Vic’s cheap years, which helps, and Dev’s deal functionally declines as a % of the cap as well. IIRC a Garland, Vassell, VW trio would cost ~55% of the cap for most of the 4 years they overlap. The new tv deal will only help.

My question is, whether they are factoring possible PG trade scenarios into their draft strategy. Hard to do since the draft comes first, but you can see how the idea of Risacher (plug and play 3/D) makes ton of sense. I assume 8 is moved to facilitate a Garland move but obviously that doesn’t have to be the case. If it’s still their I’d look to move it for bench help.

Getting to this SL starting day would be ideal:

Garland (25)
Vassell (24)
Risacher (19)
Sochan (21)
Wemby (20)

Key reserves:
Jones
Collin
Sidy
Rookie/Vet

[tbdog]

Under Chinook scenario, what would a trade look like with Murray or Young instead of Garland?

[CGD]

Under Chinook scenario, what would a trade look like with Murray or Young instead of Garland?

Cavs would want Dev since the scenario likely involves them keeping Mitc . Spurs will balk and offer Keldon + Malaki + bunch of picks.

Questions are:

(1) who can build a better offer?

(2) is there enough plug and play value for CLE between Keldon, 4/8 pick (Castle? Kencht?), and Malaki to build around Mitc and Mobley.

(3) does CLE value recouping any draft capital as part of a Garland deal since they’re depleted?

[Chinook]

Under Chinook scenario, what would a trade look like with Murray or Young instead of Garland?

The Spurs could almost completely absorb Murray into their cap space. Like trading Graham's guarantee and Wesley or Branham would do it. If the team intends to use a trade exception to snag Murray, it becomes a bit more complicated and unideal in my opinion. The Spurs would have to send out $18 Million in salary. In theory, Johnson fits this perfectly. So a trade could look like:

SA: Johnson, picks out --- Murray in
ATL: Murray out -- Ivey, picks in
DET: Ivey out -- Johnson in

It's pretty elegant, but the Spurs are left with the same holes as the Garland scenario. In addition, if 8 goes out, there's no 20th pick to use to bring in that bench forward. Maybe as part of the deal, the Spurs could use their cap space to absorb Hunter prior to the Murray/Johnson part. That would give the Spurs their starting SF without them gambling on Williams. But if you take on Hunter, you definitely want a forward coming up behind him, which makes keeping 8 all the more important.

The 3.5-D chess move might be to guarantee Graham and trade Johnson for Murray, then Graham and one of Branham/Wesley/Bassey/Champangie for Hunter. The Hawks could even use the Collins TE to absorb Johnson and create a new TE from Murray's contract. The Spurs would have the choice of either the MLE and LLE or about $9 Million in cap space and the RE.

Murray, Castle, Evans
Vassell, Branham (assuming Wesley goes out), Mitc
Hunter, Champangie, Cissoko
Sochan, O'Neale, Barlow
Wembanyama, Collins, Bassey

I feel like that team lacks shooting. If they went the MLE/LLE route, they could make a full MLE offer to Fontecchio to try to steal him from Detroit. Seems risky, though. Otherwise, they might be able to bring back Anderson to play backup PF, but his lack of shooting with Castle would be a bad fit even though that defense would be good. Maybe the LLE is enough for Evans. If it's not, finding a quality small-guard to bolster that rotation is going to be even more important. Or they could draft Dillingham rather than Castle and then be looking for a good defensive two-guard.

[jesterbobman]

I have the same general thoughts on weakness of SF.

I don't think Zach is that great, but I get the fit as a 3&D plus forward, especially if the rebounding picks up. Other SFs at the top of the draft are much more island of misfit toys (Holland is an awesome athlete and has some on ball equity that is worth betting on if he's a wing creator (but the shot), I think Matas is ultimately a PF, Cody could hit but he's more theoretical at the moment), Knecht can't defend.

For the draft, I think Castle / Sheppard is close to ideal as I don't think Zach will be there at 4, and I think Sheppard (or Dillingham, people vary) is a better bet to be a good player than than other guys I can see available at 8. (I think Matas, Holland and player X tbc go 5-6-7).

The SF options in FA are limited (Tobias Harris? I think he's a slightly above average player who's been overpaid as a max guy and underperforms in the playoffs, but he'd be an upgrade over Champagnie) other than the stars, and I can't see Paul George / LeBron / OG etc coming here.
I'd love to try and poach Isaac Okoro from Cleveland, and I get the theoretical appeal of Patrick Williams.

I'd wonder if you could get Okoro (and Cleveland) to agree to a Branham swap (if two years of cheap but worse play is worth it for the Cavs if they have $ issues), with Okoro signing for ~the MLE, and getting Patrick Williams for something similar in terms of money(or, a bit higher). I don't think Patrick Williams has proved he's really good yet, but I'd be OK with a second draft gamble on him at $15m a year or so.

I think Monk is the best player gettable in FA, but the fit might be iffy depending on how the draft goes.

[tbdog]

Monk is a great fit for most teams needing bench punch and the occasional start to manage injuries. He can finish games also. He will be sought after, and I think he is taking the best dollars. Kings only have early bird rights I think, so they kinda strapped how much they can pay him. Therefore sign and trades are out of the picture.

[MultiTroll]

Draymond Green and Veggie Miller do something that gets them banned from any involvement in the NBA.

[tbdog]

Chinook those trade ideas works out if Branham works out. What about drafting Sheppard instead of Castle in this scenario to boost shooting.

Also, I think Nets are the obvious trade candidate for Cavs and Bridges. Net's want draft capital. I believe Cavs can trade their 1st but require another in return for the 24 draft, due to Stepien rule?

[Knoxxx]

I posted this on another thread I think. Didn't get much feedback. Spurs give ATL their picks back, plus Keldon Johnson, Zack Collins, for Sarr and Murray.

First off would you do that? It gets us our PG and a nice prospect. ATL can now properly tank for the 2025-27 drafts as needed. We possibly accelerate our rebuild.

Now, I don't need the riot act or a 500-word essay about why you would or not do that. A simple yes/no is adequate re would or would not do. Me personally, I think Sarr does not impact winning immediately, but clearly Murray does. I am aware everyone is gaga about the 2025 and 2026 drafts.

I would be more interested in your other off season moves, if any, to include who to draft if we had Sarr and Murray incoming. Not needing a PG makes the 4/8 pick conversation a lot different.

[mo7888]

I posted this on another thread I think. Didn't get much feedback. Spurs give ATL their picks back, plus Keldon Johnson, Zack Collins, for Sarr and Murray.

First off would you do that? It gets us our PG and a nice prospect. ATL can now properly tank for the 2025-27 drafts as needed. We possibly accelerate our rebuild.

Now, I don't need the riot act or a 500-word essay about why you would or not do that. A simple yes/no is adequate re would or would not do. Me personally, I think Sarr does not impact winning immediately, but clearly Murray does. I am aware everyone is gaga about the 2025 and 2026 drafts.

I would be more interested in your other off season moves, if any, to include who to draft if we had Sarr and Murray incoming. Not needing a PG makes the 4/8 pick conversation a lot different.

No

[CGD]

I posted this on another thread I think. Didn't get much feedback. Spurs give ATL their picks back, plus Keldon Johnson, Zack Collins, for Sarr and Murray.

First off would you do that? It gets us our PG and a nice prospect. ATL can now properly tank for the 2025-27 drafts as needed. We possibly accelerate our rebuild.

Now, I don't need the riot act or a 500-word essay about why you would or not do that. A simple yes/no is adequate re would or would not do. Me personally, I think Sarr does not impact winning immediately, but clearly Murray does. I am aware everyone is gaga about the 2025 and 2026 drafts.

I would be more interested in your other off season moves, if any, to include who to draft if we had Sarr and Murray incoming. Not needing a PG makes the 4/8 pick conversation a lot different.

Not in this draft. 1 doesn’t appeal to me for than 4.

[Knoxxx]

Not in this draft. 1 doesn’t appeal to me for than 4.

Under this scenario, we are keeping the 4 and 8 picks, and we get 1 Sarr, OR Risacher if we prefer and Murray. We also offload the two players many want to trade away.

I didn't propose giving ATL our 4 pick for their 1 pick, if that is what you thought I was saying. We would have the 1-4-8. Yes, totally stupid to give away a possible lottery ticket for the 2025 draft, other than we don't even know that any future ATL picks will be lottery picks for us, for sure. Thus I am proposing a speed up the rebuild and bird in hand approach.

[CGD]

Under this scenario, we are keeping the 4 and 8 picks, and we get 1 Sarr, OR Risacher if we prefer and Murray. We also offload the two players many want to trade away.

I didn't propose giving ATL our 4 pick for their 1 pick, if that is what you thought I was saying. We would have the 1-4-8. Yes, totally stupid to give away a possible lottery ticket for the 2025 draft, other than we don't even know that any future ATL picks will be lottery picks for us, for sure. Thus I am proposing a speed up the rebuild and bird in hand approach.

Sorry, what I meant to say is that I don’t see enough value in THIS draft to justify getting another Top 10 pick (even if #1) by giving up both ATL picks in future drafts.

[Knoxxx]

Sorry, what I meant to say is that I don’t see enough value in THIS draft to justify getting another Top 10 pick (even if #1) by giving up both ATL picks in future drafts.

I agree with that concern, but I also think we may overrate how bad ATL is going to be and we don't know that for sure. Everyone assumes ATL is going to suck, but if they get a good return on Trae/Murray and other roster moves and/or draft picks play out, they may be as good or better this year than last. They will at least have a top PG, and we just saw how much difference that makes in W/L totals.

So I am challenging the conventional wisdom that the ATL picks are automatic gold, even in '25. If nobody challenged the CW, we'd all be cyborgs caught up in group think.

[Eaglenole2002]

I’m curious what kind of quality vets will want to come here potentially on the cheap just to play with Wemby. Onviously SA isn’t a big market so it’s tough to attract stars, but this is a pretty damn good place to try to improve your value and to play at your best — potential spacing due to Wemby’s gravity and the best eraser the NBA has ever seen to cover for any defensive woes. There are also plenty of minutes to be had.

[Pauleta14]

I’m curious what kind of quality vets will want to come here potentially on the cheap just to play with Wemby. Onviously SA isn’t a big market so it’s tough to attract stars, but this is a pretty damn good place to try to improve your value and to play at your best — potential spacing due to Wemby’s gravity and the best eraser the NBA has ever seen to cover for any defensive woes. There are also plenty of minutes to be had.

That's not gonna happen. The league keeps getting younger and veterans's value keeps risisng.

+ Fans keep fogetting it's a job first a foremost for the players. Money is always the main factor nowadays

[R. DeMurre]

I’m curious what kind of quality vets will want to come here potentially on the cheap just to play with Wemby. Onviously SA isn’t a big market so it’s tough to attract stars, but this is a pretty damn good place to try to improve your value and to play at your best — potential spacing due to Wemby’s gravity and the best eraser the NBA has ever seen to cover for any defensive woes. There are also plenty of minutes to be had.

I think about this topic a lot, and it's an interesting one because the concept of complementary players wanting to join forces with a star seems so basic, but it's still really rare. Lebron spent his first 7 seasons in Cleveland and they couldn't attract many impactful guys to join him. Same with Timmy. But I wonder if there'll be something like a Euro attraction element with Wemby, of European players wanting to be on a team where cultural backgrounds are more in tune, or if a Europe vs USA vibe plays into the equation.

[Bruno]

While Spurs have lost some flexibility by giving Vassell and Collins extensions, they have been gifted some new possibilities by being lucky during the draft lottery.

I won't give my ideal off-season, because I'm not sure what moves are possible in the real world, but I would like Spurs to follow some basic guidelines:

-Don't give up true assets for stop gaps:
It's fine for Spurs to add some aging vets to help the team as long as they keep their best assets to build their core. Best assets are first round pick (except the Charlotte pick), Vassell, Sochan and Keldon Johnson.

- Quality >> quan y:
The most important and difficult for Spurs will to be find a great Robin for Wembatman because Vassell is, at best, a third option. Spurs willl have 4 or 5 first round picks in the next 2 draft and 7 or 8 in the next 4 drafts. Spurs shouldn't hesitate to package some of these picks to get high quality players. Moves like trading down should be only done in some very specific cases.

- Don't go too slow:
Just adding rookies through the draft and doing nothing significant in the trade and FA market isn't enough for the summer. Wembanyama has shown too much things in his rookie year to be that slow in the rebuilding process.

- Don't go too fast:
It isn't as obvious as going too slow but I think the rebuilding can be too fast. Spurs won't contend next season and should use it as an opportunity to give playing time to their most promising young players. For example, if Spurs go with a PG at #4, they shouldn't add a starting caliber vet PG through trade of FA. Spurs have also a lot of holes with at least 2 or 3 starters and some bench players. If Spurs don't find a good option to fix a hole, they should let it open instead of going after a mediocre fix. Don't hurt your financial flexibility for a marginal player.

[Eaglenole2002]

That's not gonna happen. The league keeps getting younger and veterans's value keeps risisng.

+ Fans keep fogetting it's a job first a foremost for the players. Money is always the main factor nowadays

I think about this topic a lot, and it's an interesting one because the concept of complementary players wanting to join forces with a star seems so basic, but it's still really rare. Lebron spent his first 7 seasons in Cleveland and they couldn't attract many impactful guys to join him. Same with Timmy. But I wonder if there'll be something like a Euro attraction element with Wemby, of European players wanting to be on a team where cultural backgrounds are more in tune, or if a Europe vs USA vibe plays into the equation.

I don’t necessarily mean players will turn down huge money to play with Wemby, but maybe SA will be closer to the top of players’ lists of destinations for the MLE type deals, league vet, biannual exception, etc. Players respected Duncan, but it just seems like things are different with Wemby. Players see him as the future of the league and know he’s a unicorn. Cleveland with LeBron is a decent parallel, but our organization/coaching is miles ahead of Cleveland.

[venitian navigator]

Imho this draft is ideal for trade for more picks AND choosing complementary pieces.
In the first season after the "understanding" of Wemby streght and way of playing, considering that he's more than probably gonna be part of the "decision making" about choosing the right players to build the future team, I frankly would opt for drafting instead of trading for an already proven nba player...I would like to have three to four/five first round picks in this draft and would so explore the path for having these 2/3 more first round picks (we already have 2 and 2 seconds).
For example in Ayton is considered a problem by Portland, a trade could be : DAY +7+14 for KJ, Collins, Bassey, 35 and 48.


My ideal 4/5 picks :

4) Risacher
7) Castle/Topic/Sheppard
8) Edey/Clingan
14) Salaun/Holland/Buzelis