Reply With Quote
We should probably expect them to boot their picks next year, too.
If we had a competent FO then maybe I would be more on board of this idea but we don't.
We should probably expect them to boot their picks next year, too.
To any who didn't know, Timmy Duncan just keeps getting better and better.
To have pulled 5 les out and been completely robbed of a 6th.
7th 8th 9th too. But no one is disputing 2013s robbery.
Someone that got it.
Just so that people understand where I'm coming from, a move I would be perfectly fine with doing is taking advantage of the Nets blowing it up (and Marks being a friend of the house) to propose something like:
Cam Johnson for Keldon Johnson and a protected first round pick.
That's both a long and short term move. Cam makes us immediately better but also is young enough that, if the team works and finds chemistry, you know you can keep him for the next 5 to 7 years, at least. You don't have to worry about starting all over again in 3 years.
I realize you're trying to come to terms with this disgrace of a draft (if I owned the team, I'd have fired the entire front office on the spot), but just stop. You know better.
I'm late to the party, so this'll probably be buried among the rubble in minutes and I'll just be regurgitating what the few knowledgeable, non "sniffer" posters have said but . . .
- This reeks of a toxic combination of zero accountability and hubris. They're so consumed with trying to to look creative and forward thinking that they're outsmarting themselves.
- Yes, in a vacuum this might be good value, but it isn't within' this context.
- I'll believe them continuing to stockpile the "war chest" for a significant trade(s) when I see it. What was the last significant acquisition via trade that they made on their own volition?
- They're clearly trying to do what I've long said, which was recreate the Duncan era, where they can draft their rigid ideals of a Spur, fit them into their militaristic environment and live a utopian existence again.
- The picks they can't/don't want to roster, they'll either combine to trade up or more likely keep kicking the can down the road in virtual perpetuity.
- I also don't buy that this was cap related, since it only added about $6M in space and there were other avenues to do so.
- Nor do I buy the lack of roster space excuse. A team this bereft of talent, that should have an impetus to look like a competent team immediately, can't credibly make that argument.
- The worst part of all of this is that it's not the least bit surprising and that the brainwashed apologists continue to attempt to spin this as part of some grand plan, instead of acknowledging the inep ude of the past three quarter of a decade that would have got anyone else fired.
TD21 my dude, read.
At first I thought they might have a specific cap room number they were trying to get to. This would let them absorb a specific salary (or two) without giving up anything in return. They liked everyone too much to give anyone up or whatever.
But now I think they just don't want new players.
I dont think detroit is even considering moving Cunningham
Lauri will be for sale, but the Mikal trade may have broken the market in the same way Gobert did a couple years ago. the other issue is it is historically very hard to strike a deal with Ainge where he doesn't bend you over
Before we completely write off the idea of using this cap space on a free agent... let me remind everyone that Doug McDermott is a free agent.
Some of these things are so painfully obvious that it is shocking that there are people (led by the local Spurs media) who fail to see it.
it, give Ainge whatever picks he wants. It's not like we're going to do anything with them.
I'm fully expecting the Spurs to make a (semi?) Relevant move this offseason. This is the only logical explanation I find to not wanting to take on all these rookie contracts and squeezing every little space of the cap room and trying to acquiere future assets. If not, you just have to think that a group full of seasoned veterans that have been extremely succesful at what they do have just completely lost their minds and have gone full blown re s, because there's literally no other reasoning for these moves they are making.
I'm smelling that Darius Garland trade from a mile away, and that's exacty what I don't want.
I joined the Go Spurs Go club in my elementary school in 1980.
I don’t wanna wait for my life to be over.
This draft was like a Game of Thrones story where George RR Martin sets the characters you love and a perfect setting for a happy ending (two top 10 picks)... and then murders them all in the most horrific way possible.
I think the Spurs can get away with one more year of patience, but they can't be a bottom 3 team again or Wemby is going to start getting anxious.
After that, they better stop sitting on their ing hands and start playing cards.
Cody Williams and Carter snatched from our fingers because…… a pick that probably won’t be worth a top ten pick in 2030, or 2031? Insane.
if the spurs really do like Garland then they should have just kept Dillingham
it still hurts
If they were serious about cap space they would have never extended Zollins, so I don't find that to be a credible explanation.
And the seasoned veterans haven't been successful in over 5 years, and have a lot more misses than hits. And Wright has never been successful at anything other than getting hired.
I get that, and to an extent hope it’s true, but who? Trae? Garland? Ingram? None of them are needle movers and probably are net negative going forward. Barnes? Wiggins? More of the same. In theory, what you’re suggesting makes absolute sense. But I just don’t see any needle mover(s) in actuality. I love the idea of Jimmy Butler, but do we stick to a core of Blake and Branham to add a geriatric Butler for 2 years? I don’t get the point of that move, or anything in a similar vein.
I'm not saying it's a good strategy... just that its the only one that makes this draft debacle make any sense
LeBowen had an interesting approach going after Barnes and Cam Johnson. At least the team would be somewhat watchable at that point.
To be fair, I guess, they were never interested in Dillingham. They traded the pick to Minnesota so picked him.
No, I get where you’re coming from. I just got caught up on the second round pick fiasco - which only reinforces the wanna be hedge fund manager trope we’ve been commenting on. At this point, this is an unserious team. They are intentionally avoiding getting better. It’s honestly not even worth discussing at this point.I'm not saying it's a good strategy... just that its the only one that makes this draft debacle make any sense
LeBowen had an interesting approach going after Barnes and Cam Johnson. At least the team would be somewhat watchable at that point.
This quote from Wright continues to stick with me:
"We felt like the package that we got was one that made sense to move off the eighth pick for."
Just signals a complete lack of understanding of asset value and the management thereof. Just come out and say that you didn't like your options at 8. But pretending like this is some "Offer we couldn't refuse" is ing embarrassing.
Folks suggested the concept of ATL trading #1 for their 25 pick back, and it was generally agreed ATL couldn't do that because they'd be lambasted by their fans... but here we are trying to justify trading the #8 pick for a pick 7 years away (which is statistically more likely to be worse than #8). I'd normally say it's an insult to the intelligence of Spurs fans... but a lot of them are apparently slurping it up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
