Reply With Quote
It is not #4 and #8 just for #1, it is #4 and #8 for #1 and #26.
Sure, I would be down with your idea, but if the Wizards say no, I would offer 4 and 8 for 2 and 26, tbh.
COMPLETELY IGNORING the player that would be taken at #2, and whether you should move up to #2 for him, I think 4 + 35 + a future SRP should be more than enough to move from #4 to #2. I am with Mr. Body that 4+8 is a major major major overpay, especially in a flat draft. 4 + 35 alone may honest be enough to get it done. Considering the Spurs very likely do not want to bring in 3+ rookies this year, that's a move I'd do from a value POV (though I don't necessarily love Risacher).
It is not #4 and #8 just for #1, it is #4 and #8 for #1 and #26.
Sure, I would be down with your idea, but if the Wizards say no, I would offer 4 and 8 for 2 and 26, tbh.
I'm betting they'll see the grass isn't greener on the other side when they trade Trae and see they have become a deep lottery team.My logic is that Hawks won't get much worse as long as they don't own their picks.
And what are the odds of them moving into top4 again from 10-15 range?
Can this draft already be over with, it's a completely uncharted territory for us.
Talking about all the potential draftees with worse picks is fun because noone expects them to be franchise altering, but when it's two top10 picks in a draft full of uncertainty, it gets stressful.
One of these picks absolutely must develop into at least a Devin level player.
I don't think they trade Trae. Even though he's obviously not good enough to be the man, he's got the reputation and he sells ticket. Really important for a treadmill franchise.
We can hope they up DJ, Capela, maybe even Bogdan trades and get worse. And that whoever they pick with #1 doesn't develop.
In my opinion, 4 and 8 for 2 and 26 is still an overpay. Below is a very outdated chart, but I think it still holds *relatively* true.
If we went by these values, #2 is worth 3060 pts and 4+35 would be worth 2970, which is why I said maybe one more future SRP to make it work.
4+8 = 4460 pts, and 2+26 = 3900, so this would be an overpay about the value of pick #35.
In this draft, I'd say there the values 1-10 are flatter. There is a 53% drop off in value from #1 to #10 from this value chart, but I'd argue it's a lot less this year, and from 1-5 or even 1-8 it's even flatter (saw in another thread a quote from an "anonymous GM" who said there are 8 guys who could go Top 5).
I made my own pick chart, accounting for the flatter draft and for it being "Weak" at the top.
Using my chart, 4+35 is 3340 pts and #2 is 3350 so it's almost perfect. 4+8 would be 4900 and 2+26 would be 4190, which would be a difference of about the 28th/29th pick.
They’ll have to, eventually. He has an opt out in the summer of 2026, and will be 28 when the 2026-2027 season starts. They’ll want to trade him before the summer of 2025, when he essentially becomes a rental.
What makes you think they won't offer him the bag?
And it's not like other teams will be lining up to pay $300M or whatever to Trae.
What would the overpay be, roughly 500 pts, so a 35 to 40th pick? I can live with that.In my opinion, 4 and 8 for 2 and 26 is still an overpay. Below is a very outdated chart, but I think it still holds *relatively* true.
If we went by these values, #2 is worth 3060 pts and 4+35 would be worth 2970, which is why I said maybe one more future SRP to make it work.
4+8 = 4460 pts, and 2+26 = 3900, so this would be an overpay about the value of pick #35.
In this draft, I'd say there the values 1-10 are flatter. There is a 53% drop off in value from #1 to #10 from this value chart, but I'd argue it's a lot less this year, and from 1-5 or even 1-8 it's even flatter (saw in another thread a quote from an "anonymous GM" who said there are 8 guys who could go Top 5).
I made my own pick chart, accounting for the flatter draft and for it being "Weak" at the top.
Using my chart, 4+35 is 3340 pts and #2 is 3350 so it's almost perfect. 4+8 would be 4900 and 2+26 would be 4190, which would be a difference of about the 28th/29th pick.
Specially 'cause I think the difference between 1 and 2 and the rest of the top 10 prospects is bigger than you suggest. If the Spurs trade up, it is because they see Risacher (or Sarr) as a much better option than the prospects they can get at 4. Also, in this draft, it is very possible that the 26th pick ends up being better than the 8th pick. Would you be surprised if a guy like Bub Carrington or Zach Edey end up being being better NBA players than guys like Ron Holland, Matas Buzelis or Salaun?
Of course I would start the negotiations lowballing the Wizards and offering #4 and a 2nd rounder for #2, but if they don't accept, I would be willing to do 4 and 8 for 2 and 26. I'm just stating what my final offer would be. We all agree that #4 and #8 just for #2 is ridiculous.
It's possible in every draft for the 26th pick ending up better than the 8th pick. In fact, the Spurs are a great example of that having multiple times made the #29 pick (Murray, White, Keldon) better than the #8 pick in those years (Marquese Chriss, Frank Ktilikina, Jaxson Hayes). I agree that the "overpay" is worth it if the team making the overpay feels its worth it based on their own evaluation... but of course sometimes teams make bad trades because their evaluations were wrong. It's all subjective in the end.
The only thing I disagree with (which again, is my own subjective opinion) is that the #1 and #2 picks are worth more than the rest of the top 10... I definitely don't see Risacher and Sarr as significantly better prospects than these other guys. Sarr especially IMO, I don't understand the value on. It seems like he's consistently mocked in the top 2 because that's where he's been mocked all season and there is just inertia there. IMO, he's about an equivalent prospect as Jalen Duren. A nice player, but I'm not taking a rim-running defensive center with a Top 4 pick.
I agree with Sarr, I just named him because him and Risacher are the consensus 1 and 2 picks. I do think it is entirely possible that a guy in the top 10 ends up being a much better player than Risacher. In fact, I don't project Risacher as a star at all. I just think he's, by far, the surest thing to become a 35 mpg guy on a championship team. I would take that without thinking it twice in this draft, tbh. That's my reasoning behind wanting to trade up.
I don't think trading up in this draft is worth it, but it would finally show some initiative by PATFO.
Risacher won't be a star, but he's got three most important skills in today's league.
Size, defense, 3pt shooting.
The only prospect who's as close as it gets to being a guaranteed positive contributor on both ends of the floor.
Other wings can't shoot.
Guards can either shoot or defend.
Those who could do both, like Carter, are undersized.
Getting Risacher means that three starting positions for the roster that's supposed to start winning are filled.
Last edited by LeBowen; 06-11-2024 at 02:07 PM.
They’ve been shopping him like a $2 ho for a year. If he re-signs, it will be with the understanding that he will be traded. The relationship is pretty broken. He may even force his way out this summer.
To me, Spurs trading up is highly unlikely.
The biggest issue is that, at #3, anyone can be picked because Rockets might trade their pick. A scenario like Hawks or Wizards picking Risacher for Spurs and Spurs picking Clingan for them doesn't work because Clingan can be picked at #3 and be traded to a team by Rockets for a vet.
You can imagine scenarios where a trade up might work like Wizards or Hawks liking Risacher a little more than Clingan. They pick Risacher, keep him if Clingan isn't at #4 or trade him for Clingan + something if Clingan is there at #4. That's a very specific scenario and it would require that the "something" added is significant enough to tilt the balance in favor of Clingan for Wizards/Hawks.
Exactly. The comp is here is Jaden McDaniels. He doesn't have a deep "bag" and a lot of his individual metrics aren't necessarily great either, but he's capable of playing the exact role you outlined.
In the absence of obvious star power/upside, that's the next best thing and it appears attainable to the Spurs, who should have more impetus to grasp it than anyone else in this range.
I don't care about overpaying (within' reason) to do so either. That's something people are going to have to wrap their head around because it's highly unlikely some miracle trade is going to fall in their lap.
4+8 for 2 could make sense in a very top heavy class like that of '22, where Banchero and Chet went top 2 and 4 and 8 were Keegan Murray and Dyson Daniels respectively. In this class it's clearly not a reasonable proposal, the most I could see the Spurs paying in that scenario would be a far out, lottery protected pick, and that's only if the FO absolutely LOVES Risacher. Personally, I might offer the Charlotte "first" so that Washington can save face and say they got back a first even when we all know it's really 2 SRPs.
Houston is the wildcard, but to me the only player that would cause the feeding frenzy this far is Clingan. Like would OKC swap picks and overwhelm HOU with future assets? Risky as a division rival, but they have the ammo. Clearly they want a big and were recently liked to try Knicks’ Hartlesien.
And in that case, Castle is there who WAS may like (just not at 2). Would Spurs give up Castle at 4 AND an asset to get ZR? I don’t know that I would.
Trading picks 4 + 8 for 2 + 26 would be terrible in this draft... Just an awful idea tbh. Risacher isn't nearly good enough to warrant that imo. Dude projects as a career role player. Even in a weaker draft, I'd much rather have 4 and 8 than 2 and a late 1st Rounder where there really isn't a single player I'm actually interested in tbh.
No, rather have Castle. Spurs have to come away with Castle out of this draft.
At people still worried about this "star" nonsense instead of realizing that two-way players with size are even more valuable than certain (pseudo) stars and that if they don't get their own, they'll eventually have to pay an arm and a leg to get proper ones anyway.
Or they can keep hoarding every asset like it's going to the grave with them and wasting picks on high bust archetypes like Castle.
There's a fine line between undervaluing and overvaluing FRPs.
Or they can keep hoarding every asset like it's going to the grave with them and wasting picks on high bust archetypes like Castle.
For example, if Spurs traded 4 FRPs for Markkanen, everyone would lose their .
But 4 Spurs FRPs before Wemby were Sochan, Branham, Wesley and Primo.
Even if you expand it to Vassell, Keldon and Samanic, I'm not sure those 7 players are worth as much as Markkanen.
Picking and more importantly developing young players is really ing hard.
Developing a handful of them at the same time while being an awful team makes it even harder.
Every defender who can has a semblance of consistent 3pt shoot gets paid a lot these days.
We got zero good perimeter defenders and one consistent shooter.
But people would rather take theoretical players that won't offer anything for a couple more years.
35 is likely a player that won't even stick in the league so that's basically 4 for 2 and a longshot of a player at 35. Bad trade for the team trading away 2. But 4 and 8 is too much for 2.
It would be a trade for the Spurs to move up to get 2. Why would Wash want a player at 35 in this draft?
Plenty of examples have been provided of this happening already.
Really fantastic example. Draft picks are kind of like new cars - and once you drive them off the lot (make the pick), most of them lose value unless its a Porsche 911 GT3RS (Wemby) that will hold its value. Draft picks in almost every sport are overvalued because of the unknown factor that it could end up something more than what you're giving up.
A lot of posters on this board have rightful mentioned that the Spurs recent draft history shouldn't give us a whole lot of confidence in plucking the diamond out of the rough, and maybe we'd be better off moving the picks for a proven quan y. Certainly hard to argue with that!
No way you trade up to get Risacher.
He's Jabari Smith, Brandon Miller -- no bust factor at all. You could do way worse.
But you don't trade up for that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
