Reply With Quote
if we want wemby to get to his potential asap,We need a real pg who can shoot and pass.The obvious choice is tyus jones.
I dont want to with wembys growth another year.
Pop hasn't been screaming for years.
if we want wemby to get to his potential asap,We need a real pg who can shoot and pass.The obvious choice is tyus jones.
I dont want to with wembys growth another year.
He’s 27, not a “prospect for the future”
Collins has two more years. If we ever want to trade him, he needs to play.
I don't if Castle playing PG is wishful thinkg but that's where the kid wants to play, that's where reports say Pop plans to play him, and that's where the Spurs would get the most out of him.
I know how old he is. The same as Cam Johnson, who I want to trade for. You can easily get 7 to 10 more years from a 27 year old in today's sports, tbh.He’s 27, not a “prospect for the future”
Maybe "prospect" wasn't the best choice of word. I meant a player that can develop chemistry and be worked into the core for years to come.
I didn't misunderstand that. Regardless, it's odd that someone who's covered the Spurs as long as timvp would get caught up in the myth of timelines. Timelines are not real. Windows are, though. If Wemby develops the way he should, the Spurs will have a natural window in four to six seasons. However, Victor's talent combined with the Spurs' assets and flexibility can allow them to potentially open an earlier window in about a year or two if they are sufficiently aggressive. Think of it like Tim's natural window being 2003 to 2007 but him being drafted by a vet playoff team meaning that 1999 was an option. I wouldn't consider George or Butler quite enough to get there. They'd either need another piece or for a young guy to step up. It would be more like if they got Curry, Lebron or Kawhi (who had a full, healthy season somehow).No, need. I already have your "Spurs should go for George or Butler" as example. Just busting your balls, tbh.
From everything they've said, the Spurs seem to be almost completely focused on waiting until Wemby's natural window opens. The issue with that is that most of their assets will be used by then. Unless they trade picks for future selections over and over, they're going to end up wasting a lot of cap and assets on pieces that won't help with the natural window which could've been used for the early window -- think more Branhams and Osmans. It's like how one poster suggested the Spurs could "roll cap over" when that's not a thing.
I could pull a you and make a whole thread about this. I don't know if there will be a sufficiently evocative event for me to post it to create maximum confusion though. Also scott made a post going more into this sort of concept last year when I was filling the niche you currently occupy.
Well, PATFO already made their choice, and they decided to go with Castle for the time being. It makes no sense to add another PG and create a logjam. At least not during this offseason. If during the season Castle proves to be a better option as a wing than as a PG, then you can start to think about adding another PG.
What's the point if you hurt your team , like to spurs did when they traded Poeltl for a 2024 pick that ended up getting traded for 2030 pick that may not convey at all and a 2031 pick that will convey but may not be better than the #8 you originally traded. Not sure I see the positive side of that trade. Stockpiling assets is fine, just use then when you can, just don't kick it half a decade or more down the road.
It would be nice if the spurs could trade an asset that far in advance for something of value now, but I don't think most NBA teams fall for that trick. Like I've said before, I think that there are two camps in the spurs front office. One that makes good common sense decisions and one that makes bad ones. This one was the latter.
Years ago when the spurs were a good team, 1st rounders barely played or were stuck in Austin or Europe because the roster was so good. Those days are long gone. We need the talent now, not 7 years in the future. I think we can all agree on that.
Thoughts on something like my Lavine for Keldon+Collins deal where CHI lowers the pick protections from 10,8 and 8 to 2, 2, 2? If SA isn’t going to use space or sign anyone really, what does it hurt especially if its Keldon/Collins going out that negate a lot of Lavines money years 1 & 2?
Sure, if besides Paul George, we could add a Steph Curry, I would be down with your idea, because that team would be good enough to contend. But adding just a Paul George or a Jimmy Butler does nothing more than have guys like Castle and Vassell take a backseat, give assets away and get a worse draft pick, only for us to lose in the first round of the playoffs.
Even if we manage to create a good enough team to semi-contend in 2 or 3 years, it would all be in vain, since by that point we would need to replace George/Butler before the window is really open.
Cam Johnson seems like a no-brainer target, tbh.
This whole thing is being looked at as too black and white in terms of archaic positional labels.
They need another starting caliber, secondary ball handler type, who can space the floor.
That balance would ensure that they wouldn't be putting too much on Castle's plate to be a lead guard or relegating him too much to off ball duties.
Two things that constantly get overlooked when saying the Dillingham trade was to help create a superstar package is that.
a) Teams tend to want young players as part of those types of trades, so there's more value in using that pick and having them play well than turning them into a faceless future pick that's fungible compared to the picks already in the stockpile
b) Major trades devastate depth, so using the pick on a player who can backfill for a more important/experienced player who had to be traded away also makes sense.
From where the roster is, this trade can only be understood in the context of "The Spurs did not like anyone else in the first round of the draft at all". The Spurs will almost inevitably be proven wrong in that someone in that 8-34 range will show themselves to be worth more than MIN31. At the same time, you can't expect scouting departments to be psychic. Everyone has misses. If it ends up that a whole bunch of players in the 8-15 range are worth more than a distant unprotected first, however, then it's a major black eye on the scouting department and more evidence that the basketball operations structure needs to be disassembled from foundation to roof and a new, better version put in its place.
Last edited by Chinook; 06-30-2024 at 04:50 PM.
Im all for spurs improving and using trades, but feels like Cam make take more of a premier pick to get than I would like. Im good with CHA pick and 2nds and maybe a heavily protected future first for a good player, but unless its someone we see that fits alongside the young core for a good while, Im not giving up CHI pick or any of ATL or any Spurs picks that aren’t heavily protected.
I would love Cam for Keldon type deal, but if he cost a premium first I am probably out.
Ironically, as much on the same page we are about windows, it's actually the source of our difference of opinion on Lauri.
I see Lauri as the kind of guy you can acquire and have around for the early window and the natural window, and then add another high end piece (ex: PG13) in the early window while Wemby is on his rookie deal.
Its not important and it's fine we disagree and I'm not trying to convince you of anything on Lauri, just pointing out that this windows comment can still lead to disagreement on the proper deployment of assets in these windows.
The max I would be willing to give up for a Cam Johnson type player is Keldon, a top 20 protected first round pick and maybe the Cha pick. 3 and D role players shouldn't cost much more than that, tbh.
I agree but Im saying I think it will take more as Cam will be sought after I am guessing.
Stephon doesn’t need to be a volume 3 pt shooter to be the lead guard of the team. Lead guard duties involve much more than pulling up for a 3. Tre spent much time as a PG controlling the pace of the offense and setting others up. He had three 3 pt attempts per game. That’s as much attempts a lead guard in this Spurs offense will need because they will he busy being quarterbacks of the offense. Yes, that point needs to be able to hit shots when Wemby or other players are generating those open looks, but most of the time that won’t be the case. It’s my opinion anyway that Castle won’t be abysmal in that area (catch and shoot 3’s) that it won’t be impossible for him to reach Tre’s 3 pt percentages last season as a baseline. It’s completely overstated that the future point guard of this team NEEDS to be a 3 pt specialist or above average shooter. The more important skills at lead guard are being able to be a POA defender and to be able to be enough of a threat on offense that they can cause the defense to collapse. Being an ace shooter from the 3 pt line is secondary.
I've seen POA as a big talking point in this forum, but how much does that really matter when teams nowadays just create switches and attack whoever they choose from the opposing team. Switchability is more relebant than POA, tbh.
I'm not talking about Curry and George -- that's impossible. I'm talking about Curry and a bunch of win-now vets (think KCP, Bruce Brown) or George and either add one of the younger vets people think would be a good second banana to Wemby like Garland or someone like Vassell takes the next step to being a stable 20-plus ppg scorer who makes his teammates better. Unless Curry becomes available this summer, I don't see any reason to focus on this window until the trade deadline when they can see if where Wemby is.
In "2 or 3 years" you don't have to replace George. You add to him. PG moves over to be the third banana, someone new is the second banana and Wemby is the undisputed first banana. Think of the relationship between Duncan, Parker and Kawhi circa 2015. Hopefully that second guy is someone the Spurs already have on their roster who's organically improved ala Leonard. But because the team has so many assets and because we're talking about Wemby on either a rookie contract or in the first year of a tier-1 max, there should be room to add that guy through other means.
And no, before you jump in, that's not evidence for why the Spurs should tank. Yes, it would be great if they could guarantee themselves a young stud. But they can't guarantee that they'll be in position to draft a great prospect nor that that prospect will pan out. That's why making both picks this year and hoping at least one of them developed to hit that groove was so important. Even if he remained flawed, a Dillingham who's blossomed into a Young-lite would've been huge for an old PG who could get it done sometimes but needed to take a step back and a Wemby in his early prime who just needed somebody to punish defenses that tried to focus too much on him.
Yes, both are important. When the opposing ball handler isn’t contained though, it has disastrous effects on our overall defense. If Castle is switched onto Brunson because Brunson has the ball, that’s the POA. If Castle is on Durant because he switched on him and Durant has the ball, that’s the POA. Point is, we need to stop the bleeding at POA and having someone who is good at on ball defense is advantageous.
What about when that player is really good at navigating screens? You can't just politely ask defenders to get switched up when you can't switch them up.
It’s posts like this which prove you don’t follow other teams besides the Spurs in the NBA or even follow the nba at all. Yeah the lead guard has to shoot more than 3 three pointer a game.
In the past decade there has been only one team whose point guard didn’t shoot 5 threes a game and make them at a high level. And that was the LA Lakers in the bubble year.
Oh, I'm aware we still have our differences of opinion. I don't think either of us have moved from our positions so much as the cir stances have changed to where the common ground we share is more prominent.
My particular take (because as I told DAF, we all have our own ideas on specifically what works) on the windows argument was that the Spurs could only open the first window by getting a Shaq for Wemby's Wade. I think the path forward if the Spurs woke up with a hangover and found Lauri in bed with them is that they'd need to be even more aggressive to acquire a third star to fill the gaps. That's similar to how you mentioned George, but I'd prefer a guard for balance's sake. If I had my druthers, the team to be aggressive with whom they pursue as their second star rather than being aggressive in pursuing two additional stars. But as you said, that's just a difference of opinion.
If this next year goes the way I expect it to, DAF will be right with us frustrated with the front office's lack of action while someone like ATL is making threads telling us why 2026 is worth tanking for.
And it’s posts like this that show how much better it is to talk basketball with other people on this website than someone like you who accuse me of things you know nothing about. I’m giving your post a hard pass and will look for someone else who I can take seriously and won’t waste my time.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions