Reply With Quote
No. You can get out of both Collins and Keldon for fairly cheap if you need to, Lavine is a different story. It would be an epic screw up.
I will preface this with I dont want it and would not do it. But IF you could get Lavine from CHI for Keldon+Collins would you do it?
Lavine has 3 years left on his deal, Collins has 2 and Keldon 3. So effectively you’d be paying what you pay for Keldon/Collins anyways + 6/8M for the first two years to Lavine. The only year where the money is materially different is year 3 where Lavine has a 49M player option where Keldon is making only 17.5M and Collins would be off the books already.
No. You can get out of both Collins and Keldon for fairly cheap if you need to, Lavine is a different story. It would be an epic screw up.
Klay is done, and personally I wouldn't commit to any salary beyond '25 unless it was 'a deal you can't refuse'.
If we went with something like Castle/Dilly in the draft, I wonder about an Obi Topping signing. I see him as a very similar achetype as Sochan, but with a much more developed offensive skill set (and 40% from 3 last year) while maybe not as strong on defense or rebounding (though Toppin's defensive metrics look better on paper). They may be too similar, and if the Spurs believe in Sochan it may not make a lot of sense to pair him with a similar player who might be better and logically supplant him in the starting role. But I'm intrigued by Toppin. If Sochan were required in a trade (say for Markkanen), I would look at Toppin as a replacement.
Even though the money is net neutral (for most part, not exactly) for 2 out of the 3 years? In year 3 when Lavine is an expiring do you think you could get out of it?
I like Lavine probably more than most on this board, and I wouldn't do it. He has no ability to stay healthy and you can probably get positive value for Keldon and just tough it out for one more year of Collins until he becomes a relatively neutral expiring. If Chicago is including picks... I might listen.
I think it would be similar to the Westbrook situation where LAL had to give up an FRP to get off his expiring, except in this case Lavine might be out injured while having opted into $49MM. That might be costly to move off of even as an expiring.
This FA class is trash. What is out there? Monk? Pat Williams if Chicago won't match (I'm scared to even think of what the numbers would be)? Gary Harris? Honestly, Spurs might as well keep powder dry for the opportunity that will inevitably come sooner rather than later.
I agree for that exact reason personally. But I can also see, if that’s the cost, its one way to somewhat safely take a swing since money is net neutral for 2 of the 3 years and if things went wrong, SA could survive loss of Keldon/Collins with both their salary cap and abundance of picks to replace them but at least you have some semblance of upside with Lavine (even if its high risk in terms of his availability)
The money is not net neutral, Lavine is set to make 43M, 46M, 49M for the remainder of his contract; Keldon, 19M, 17.5M and 17.5M; Collins, 17M and 18M. So basically it's 43M vs 36M in year 1, 46M vs 35.5M in year 2, and 49M vs 18M in year 3, you're committing to an additional 49.5M. Furthermore, it's easier to move a contract if it's split into smaller chunks. Lastly, Keldon is not seen as a negative, maybe neutral but someone will take him if you want him off your books. , you had him as worth the no. 5 by himself just a few hours ago, now you're bringing him up as comparable to one of the worst contracts in the league?As for Collins, yes, he's a bad contract but he's expiring in a year and, by then, perfect trade fodder.
For all we know Lavine may be the next Lonzo, taking on his deal is borderline suicidal. That contract is toxic as nuclear waste. I'd rather get gonorrhea.
No way come out this offseason with out some type of change.We would look bad trying not to upgrade.
Some type of playmaker is a must imo.
Lavine has no upside.
I wrote about it already, can't find the post right now.
Anyhow, they started the season 5-14 and went 34-29 the rest of the way after he got injured. He did play 7 more games, but was obviously not healthy and averaged just 15ppg.
I don't disagree, but you can do that without taking on long term salary, say by trading for Brogdon for a 2nd round pick plus cap relief for Portland. Spurs shouldn't be a dumpster fire this year, but should avoid making costly mistakes just as much. I don't think it's hard to do, simply the FO didn't want to do it.
The first two years, Spurs have plenty of cap space. I dont see them using it all, especially if they get Lavine, so I mean functionally it’s mostly neutral. I do value Keldon - hes the reason you may be able to get Lavine here.The money is not net neutral, Lavine is set to make 43M, 46M, 49M for the remainder of his contract; Keldon, 19M, 17.5M and 17.5M; Collins, 17M and 18M. So basically it's 43M vs 36M in year 1, 46M vs 35.5M in year 2, and 49M vs 18M in year 3, you're committing to an additional 49.5M. Furthermore, it's easier to move a contract if it's split into smaller chunks. Lastly, Keldon is not seen as a negative, maybe neutral but someone will take him if you want him off your books. , you had him as worth the no. 5 by himself just a few hours ago, now you're bringing him up as comparable to one of the worst contracts in the league?
For all we know Lavine may be the next Lonzo, taking on his deal is borderline suicidal. That contract is toxic as nuclear waste. I'd rather get gonorrhea.
I said I wouldn’t do it, but I feel like its a fair risk/reward question to ask
´24 Lavine is the new '23 Beal, whomever takes on his deal will regret it not before too long. Asking the question is fine, but it's a risk a hopeless team should take, Spurs are going to have lots of better options at their disposal, as long as they don't shoot themselves on the foot.
Spurs won't have a lot of cap space if they're to improve.
Let's go with the assumption that Wemby, Devin and Sochan are long-term pieces.
Maybe Tre, but I'm not a fan if we can get someone better. Champagnie will be there as backup perimeter player.
Wesley and Branham are surely gone next summer if they don't improve. Same for Cissoko and Bassey.
Cap situation next summer for the upcoming 25-26 season would be something like:
Devin $27M
Wemby $13.4M
Jeremy $7M
Champagnie $3M
Rookies ~$25M (assuming we draft two players in '24 and two in '25 with Spurs/Hawks picks)
That's ~$70M for 8 players and Cap projection is at $155M for 25-26 season.
Franchise player, two key rotation pieces and a bunch of rookies who may or may not be useful at that point.
$85M left for between 3 and 6 rotation players, assuming that at least one of the rookies is a valuable contributor at that point.
Get a second option for Wemby? ~$40M for a max contract.
Then you either get two more quality role players for ~$45M if rookies are contribution or you spread that money around for more solid role players.
This cap heavily favors rosters with two max players, superteams are a thing of the past.
Which is amazing for us because Wemby will soon be the best player in the league and taking him down with just two max players if he's got a good second option will be really hard.
Teams that go with three max players will have no depth whatsoever.
For example, even OKC will have to commit like 80% of their cap to three max contracts in a few years and then either have rookie contracts on the rest of the roster or pay a lot of luxury tax.
While our cap situation is very good, it can change quickly and we should avoid max players that aren't actual all-stars and a good fit.
Dalano Banton has shown out in a larger role in Portland, still young and could be had for cheap.
Dalano Banton has averaged 19.4 points, 5.2 rebounds and 4.3 assists in 20 games in his last 20 games in his career
https://basketball.realgm.com/wireta...h-Knicks-Offer
OG would be the perfect player to add to the team. Spurs would need to make some moves to open the space (can he be S&T'd?) but if he is testing the market he should be target #1 imho
i doubt the knicks are nickle and diming him, they almost certainly made a substantial offer. they know that they sent assets to get him and for sure want to keep him. so this might just be him saying he wants max and nothing less.
OG is the type of player that is a good fit for basically any team. checks all the "role player" boxes very well. plays good defense? check. good size/athleticism and defensive versatility? check. strong outside shooting? check. able to beat closeouts and make plays in transition? check. low maintenance character? check.
ultimately the market will decide how much guys get paid, and historically teams had been ok giving all kinds of players max contracts who didnt seem like max players, and the narrative has been that we'll see teams tighten the belts under the new CBA. anunoby is a of a test subject for that theory
Last edited by spurraider21; 06-18-2024 at 03:28 PM.
probably right, but Dolan has always been a owner so you never know. Still, Spurs should be doing their due diligence here
OG is arguably the best 3-D wing in the league right now, ridiculous defensively, but he's got some serious injury concerns. It's always something.
He won't sign for anything less than 160/4.
Assuming we draft two players and waive Graham, we'll be around 21M under the cap.
Get rid Collins, don't pick up Wesley's option and we're at 40M.
Won't happen though.
wesley's option that we could decline is for the 25-26 season. we picked up his 24-25 option before the start of last season. we cant get out of that salary.
That's because the Spurs wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole. Hield, Monk and Oubre Jr. also don't fit their rigid ideals.
Almost 25 and ac ulated his empty calorie counting stats (47.1 EFG%, about 6% below league average and 50.8 TS%, about 7% below league average) thanks to inflated minutes (29.2 mpg) and usage rate (27.2) on a tanking team.
Hard pass.
as always the money is part of the equation, but ive mentioned D'Lo as somebody i'd have interest in, if we cant make Malik Monk happen
lakers ran a lot of inverted PnR with lebron and russell and it worked well. could see a lot of that w/ wemby
Lavine is damaged goods. The issues go way beyond his bloated salary.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
