Grading the Off-Season (as of Mid July)

[JPB]

This poll is really refreshing to see the myopic, impatient, cliff jumpers are WAY fewer than they appear on this board.
Building on what? How about the ing best defensive player in the league entering his second yr. How about a guy who looks prime to be both the best on O & D. Who else has done that in the modern era? Jordan (maybe DR & Hakeem have an argument in 94/95 but only bc Jordan’s gambling suspension.)

How many ing teams wouldn't trade positions (Roster + picks + cap situation) with the Spurs?
Bos, OKC, NY, Dal, Min- they all think/hope they can win multi les in the next 5 yrs. Note all have a young Top6 guy + Brunson/Nova Knicks.
Den, Phi, Orl, Ind- they’re maybes bc they think they can win one more or get to that 1st lvl.
Many of these teams won’t win & will start blowing it up in 2yrs (& the Spurs will have the cap space & the pieces to get into any of those blow-up trades)

Everyone else would absolutely change position with the Spurs. Mil swaps in a heartbeat. Hou has a great War chest & a nice collection of young role players with maybe star potential but they are missing the hardest thing to get, a top #5 player. Spurs have that, the next face of the NBA.

Spurs are in amazing shape, even if you conveniently leave out Vassel & Castle. Good to see so clearly you are nothing but a clown or a troll.

Learn to read before getting on you patronizing high horses. And not just this thread. what you're talking about there have been discussed ad nauseam, and in a much more educated, moderate way. You're off topic.

What I was answering to if the idea this year could be used to develop the current roster, as if it was some kind of core, while most of these guys will be gone before 2 years. If it's just to yell: "duh, we have ing Wemby, ing picks and ing cap!" Be patient! Were gonna kick some ass soon!!" Well, thanks, noboby noticed...

And as far as the best postion in the league is concerned, picks and cap are nothing if you don't use them correctly. Not like spurs drafted well these past few years (Wemby is off discussion obviously) and there will be plenty of available stars in the next few years. Luck and opportunities are also big factors (like when we got Vic) it doesn't just depend on you.

We'lll see what happens, how Castle develop and who they can/will pick next year ad/or trade for, but the path to success is not as obvious as you want it to be, specially with an outdated coach ( Sochan at PG, for real?) just because we got Wemby, picks and cap. There's a lot of work anyway, and to my original point, right now there's not much you can build around on this roster. Next year will just be another tanking one.

[drpill]

As it stands, it's a B from me. It certainly falls short of whatever a "perfect" offseason might look like. But the organization has kept its eye on the target -- long term sustained success building around a once in a lifetime player. It's easy to second guess any of these moves but it's not as though there isn't a consistent logic and vision here.

The outcome of the draft was a shock to the system, a reminder that this team is going to zig when you expect them to zag, but in hindsight the vision is pretty obvious -- their focus is on the 2025 draft and they didn't see the need to invest in a second rookie this year when they didn't love the prospects available. I think time will show there were more than a couple of players they could have selected who would have helped considerably, but there is logic behind gambling on future assets in a long term strategy, with so many picks in the next few years in presumably superior drafts. Castle is looking like a very solid choice and I think he will bring some on-court discipline and decisiveness to the team, along with raising the defensive ceiling considerably. No complaints from me there. I wish they could have got a quality shooter with such a high pick, but there were hardly any of those at the top of the draft. The second round was just as mystifying as the first at the time, and it's still challenging to see the logic behind their choices there. Maybe they really love Núñez; he looks like he has a certain offensive creativity that I think they need to place a lot of value on when building around Wemby. What a surprise, though, that he is yet another player who can't shoot. We also seem over-invested at point guard already... Maybe he was a hedge against Castle not working out as a primary ballhandler. Furphy would have made more sense to me considering the roster. Ingram looks like a good guy and he can sort of shoot, so fine, I guess? I don't expect much from him but you never know.

As for other offseason moves, I'm happy about the Paul and Barnes acquisitions. I never thought I'd say that about adding Chris Paul to be honest, but after watching this team's struggles last season it feels like the perfect prescription. It's short-term, development focused, and it's the kind of move that should leave a positive impact on the team throughout the Wembanyama era. Barnes is another steadying hand for a team still learning to play under control. I hope both guys are here all season. Beyond the starters, the rest of the roster is still generally not great, but everything makes more sense with the three new additions and restructured hierarchy. It should give guys a chance to play a more natural role, which may help clear up who belongs and who doesn't.

Overall, could be worse! I think the best case and most likely outcome is still a 2025 lottery selection with the Spurs' natural pick, with plenty of growth along the way. Maybe they catch lightning in a bottle and end up in the playoffs, which is also a nice outcome with plenty of benefits. Should be a very fun season in any event.

[scott]

I've really enjoyed reading everyone else's grades and evaluations - there is certainly a wide range of opinions and rationales, even of similar grades.

I really like how jesterbobman approached his evaluation looking at Direction and Execution, and I'm going to do something similar.

Direction Grade: C

I think the Spurs are taking the most conservative, obvious, safe route that most teams with the luxury of time would take: slow, steady, patient. Essentially, they're trotting down the path of "common sense". That might sound like a good thing, but excellence is not common, and uncommon ends are often not achieved via common means.

Through the various discusses we have on this website, most folks seem to acknowledge how value contracts are valuable assets. In that vein, I submit the Spurs conservative approach is depleting one of the most valuable assets the team has: Victor Wembanama's rookie contract. I strongly believe Wemby will be a Top-10 player this year, probably a Top-5 player next year, and perhaps the hands down best player in the league by Year 4. For 3 more seasons, we'll have this player on the equivalent of an MLE deal before he justifiably costs a Rookie Supermax. To not take advantage of this, in my mind, is a wasted opportunity. Yes, Year 2 Wemby will only be a fraction of his ultimate form, but that is irrelevant. He's that good now, the fact that he'll be even better down the road shouldn't stop us from taking advantage of his greatness today. This doesn't mean "go all in", but it should mean doing more than treating him like you would any other rookie with a slow, developmental approach.

Alas, the slow, development approach is the one we are taking. The team wants to slowly add the pieces around Wemby. Like I said, this is the approach most teams would take - the "common sense" approach. To me, it borders right on the line between conservatism and cowardice. Our FO enjoys an unprecedented level of job security, but they do not leverage that security to empower bold moves. Perhaps this is how one achieves said level of job security, and there is an argument to be made about that. With that said I believe we are one of the leauge's 3 Great Franchises. The Spurs, Celtics and Lakers. Those are the Royal Houses of the NBA - the franchises with the highest all-time winning records and with a bevy of les (and, most importantly, modern era les) to go with it. These are franchises that should not tolerate long-term stretches of losing (though the Celtics and Lakers each have in their history a single 6-year stretch of missing the playoffs, which looks like we're on track to match this upcoming season), but the Spurs currently seem quite contented with it.

The Spurs have long-enjoyed a record that should be the source of much pride: the highest winning percentage of all time in ANY of the 3 major American Sporting leagues (NBA, MLB, NFL). However, this is a record we have enjoyed since the 1990s, will likely be relinquished this upcoming season to the Celtics. If Boston wins 55 games this year, we will have to win 47 to maintain that record (spoiler alert, probably not going to happen).

I'd like to see our team act like one of the Great Royal Franchises that it is. Yes, we are a small market team, but so are the Green Bay Packers, one of the NFL's Royal Franchises. Being Small Market doesn't mean we need to operate on the borderline between conservatism and cowardice. Our team should hold itself to the high standard it has set throughout its history.

Execution Grade: B+

With the slow, conservative approach as the Direction, the Spurs are doing an above average, almost excellent job. They are adding high quality long-term pieces (Castle) while taking advantage of their position as a team not really looking to contend to ac ulate valuable long-term assets (like getting that 20131 SAC swap for nothing). They're adding relatively low-cost (both in terms of actual dollars and opportunity cost) veterans to help with the continued development of our youth (CP3, Barnes).

What holds this back from being an A is the the decision to punt on pick #8 (and to a lesser extent, #35), and I don't think it can be called anything other than a punt. The notion that we got some amazing return for that pick is pure and uncut copium in its most unadulterated form. Turning the #8 pick into a 6-year out swap and a 7-year out unprotected FRP is an objectively poor return on value. You may want to convince yourself that this is some master stroke and those picks may turn out better, and they may, but if you quan atively value these picks in an objective manner, you'll quickly see the Spurs got a dimes-on-the-dollar return. The concept of not taking another prospect at #8 is fine (though debatable), but the return is objectively bad and the FO deserves criticism for that.

I won't go into the team's handling of SRPs in recent years, because it's been addressed and discussed ad nauseum, but I'll just echo that it is questionable at best.

Aside from the draft, I can't criticize the FO's execution within the context of their Direction very much. It solidly achieves the direction they are taking.

Overall Grade: C

An excellent execution of a middling plan is still a middling result, and that's what I think we have here. To me, the best short summation of what the Spurs are doing is: it's fine. I don't think it's a D or an F, it's a firm C... a textbook encapsulation of average. No "costly mistakes" were made, because the Spurs don't take the risks that could lead to those costly mistakes. But without risks, the rewards are muted.

[TD 21]

Not convinced that a team with prime Anthony Edwards is gonna be that bad to make those 2030/2031 assets that appealing.

That's an eternity in the NBA. Whose to say Edwards won't suffer a career altering injury? Or won't have forced his way out by then? Or that the Spurs won't re-route those assets before then?

[spurraider21]

and you can make a case for why the wolves wont be good. but lets grant that prime edwards is there.

they wont be able to add much talent in the draft. they outright owe their 2025, 2027, 2029 picks, and their 2026 pick may be swapped.

they also are going to be in a rough spot cap wise. they're already a second apron team now, and they'll have to make adjustments to get out of that next year. its possible if gobert declines his player option and agrees to a longer term deal on a lower APY. but then you are committing to a mutliyear deal with a 33yo gobert, who will be 38 in 2030 when they start owing us picks.

they may end up being forced to part with KAT. and minnesota doesnt have any FA allure.

a team strapped for picks, a poor cap situation, and not a desirable FA destination isn't likely to give edwards great infrastructure to work with

so by the time 2030 rolls around, they may end up giving us a good pick and hopefully get swapped near the end of the first round. that also prevents them from improving before handing over the 2031 pick

[Seventyniner]

and you can make a case for why the wolves wont be good. but lets grant that prime edwards is there.

they wont be able to add much talent in the draft. they outright owe their 2025, 2027, 2029 picks, and their 2026 pick may be swapped.

they also are going to be in a rough spot cap wise. they're already a second apron team now, and they'll have to make adjustments to get out of that next year. its possible if gobert declines his player option and agrees to a longer term deal on a lower APY. but then you are committing to a mutliyear deal with a 33yo gobert, who will be 38 in 2030 when they start owing us picks.

they may end up being forced to part with KAT. and minnesota doesnt have any FA allure.

a team strapped for picks, a poor cap situation, and not a desirable FA destination isn't likely to give edwards great infrastructure to work with

so by the time 2030 rolls around, they may end up giving us a good pick and hopefully get swapped near the end of the first round. that also prevents them from improving before handing over the 2031 pick

If I could get an almost unprotected 2030 swap and a totally unprotected 20131 pick from any team in the league, not many teams would rank clearly above Minnesota.

Maybe chronically bad teams like the DET/CHA/WAS, but even they can improve. None of them are anywhere near the second apron, and a team records from one season to five seasons later have almost no correlation. The Wolves, on the other hand, have a clear path to bottoming out since so many of their future draft picks are already owed and they are in second apron already.

How about the Kings? Oh wait...

[offset formation]

I graded them a C