Reply With Quote
NO would laugh in the Spurs faces at that offer.
What are my other options for moving Vassell in that scenario? Can I move Devin for Aldama, for example?
If it's a hypothetical situation where literally no one else in the league will touch Devin... then yeah I think I might do that deal and then try to move #5 in another deal (reminder, my context is that I actually hate this draft outside of the Top 2). Maybe I take Kon there I guess if not?
My rationale is that as much as Devin doesn't fit now he DEFINITELY doesn't fit if you draft Harper. However, if there is any kind of reasonable value for Devin separate of this deal, then I take Harper at 2 and get what I can for Devin elsewhere.
NO would laugh in the Spurs faces at that offer.
I think Devin definitely doesn't fit regardless of any other roster moves. But you could see Harper, Castle, and Fox working together? I'd see landing Harper as the gift from god to trade for a high end SF or PF.
I also wouldn't keep Harper unless they're certain he's got star potential.
If by some miracle he ends up with the Spurs, it would be easy enough to use him as a 6th man in his rookie year and then get rid of either Fox or Castle if Harper is better. NBA is a business after all, no hard feelings.
Castle is easily big and physical enough to play at the 3. The thing about trying to LoB in the second apron era is that cheap contracts are everything, and you surrender that by trading for pricy vets. If you think Harper has a decent chance to be a star, you keep him, and develop him within the Wemby/Fox structure. Then, you take the difference between his $10M salary and the pricy vet salary and go get a couple of 3&Ds.
Murphy's on a great contract and fits the roster. Harper's probably only slightly better than Castle as a shooter so I don't see how those three play together. I know spurraider21 brought up the Kings still taking Haliburton when they already had Fox, but I'm not screwing De'Aaron over and trading him in a year or two after he forced the trade here. That would look so bad to other agents and could really hurt the Spurs in the long term. It made more sense when Haliburton was a #12 pick but with Harper a #2 pick GMs are lusting over right now feels like it would be an ideal time to trade him instead of wasting time developing him only to have to trade him anyways in a couple of years when he may or may not have the worth he has now in trade. I definitely don't see Harper as a SG either.
You think that wouldn't completely poison the Spurs with other agents, much less Klutch, trading Fox after he forced his way here? I don't think the Spurs can afford to do De'Aaron like that and I hope they wouldn't even consider it.
I agree, but stranger things have happened.
If there's a trade that gets Fox to another contender maybe?
Idk why are we even discussing this, we're not moving up yet again unless CIA Pop managed to secure one final gift for the franchise.
I think you have Harper or Castle as 6th man next season (you let them fight it out to see who starts between them), and then you Haliburton one of Fox/Castle/Harper depending on how the season plays out. Harper (along with Flagg obviously) are good enough to be in the "you draft them and figure it out later" category of prospect.
I mean assuming health we got Wemby (Star) and Fox (Star) with Castle having a pretty good rookie year (maybe future star)
At some point you just need some regular players to do regular things. Real life aint 2k you don't need or probably even want a legit "star" player taking 12 shots a game cause that's all he can get playing with 2 or 3 other star players.
Flagg is but I have my doubts whether Harper is when he couldn't even make the tourney. He'd have tremendous trade value on draft day though, and there's a decent shot it's the most value he ever has. Also don't see any way the Spurs can trade Fox for at least a couple years without for sure burning bridges with Klutch much less giving all the agents in the league reason to give pause to bringing their clients here. Feel like cashing in the asset immediately would be the best course of action if the Spurs lucked into that #2 pick, but I'm lower than most on Harper.
I won't claim to be a Harper expert. Only seen highlights and going off what other people (mostly Vecenie) say.
So, I'd approach your question this way if I'm the GM and I have a scouting department I trust feeding me evaluations:
- If the scouting department tells me Harper is clearly the #2 pick, but there some significant question marks about him (similar to Scoot and Brandon Miller in their draft year), then I'll take the trade with NOP for TMIII (though I'm gonna try to expand it and get Herb for Sochan as well)
- If the scouting department tells me this guy grades out higher than most #2 picks and would be #1 in most other years yada yada yada... I'm going the route I originally stated
- I understand your hesitation with potentially trading Fox down the road, but I worry about that later (and I honestly feel you're probably trading Castle or Harper in the Haliburton-scenario anyway, not Fox).
- I think it's definitely a fair point though that pre-draft is the peak of Harper's value and I don't think I can really argue that. So that's some extra food for thought.
- I'm definitely sitting the scouts and coaching staff in a room and probing to see if there is any way we can make a lineup with all three of them work, though I'm skeptical it could. Harper and Castle both have great size for combo guards, but not great enough for me to want to force them into playing SF.
I was watching the post game mingle and dap with Boston, and Steph was every bit the same size and build as Jaylen Brown, and he’s a pure SF.
Tatum is the SF
That's an interesting counter point to think about (and also worth noting that Harper is listed as taller than Castle, though I'm not sure if that will turn out to be true).
I think it's also worth noting that the Celtics offense is completely different than ours though, and Jaylen is their worst shooter (not just of their starting 5, but really of their entire regular rotation excluding guys who don't take any 3s). We talk a lot about Jimmy, but Jaylen might be a decent comp for Steph. Jaylen's 32% this year is a career low though, he's a career 36% shooter and the rest of the team is all shooters so it's a little different. Let's say Wemby becomes a 40% shooter (which I actually don't think is that crazy), I still don't think we can get away with Fox/Harper/Castle at 1-3 when all of them shoot 34% or worse... but you bring up an interesting way to think about it.
Well, Pritchard and White are the SGs.
Fox is all over the place, but his last pre-injury season was 37% on 7.8 attempts. He’s going to get a LOT of open looks playing off Wemby.
I'd love it if happened, but seems like more an aberration than his true shooting ability. I do think Fox will end up closer to 35-36% with us eventually, but even at 33-34%, he's not a guy teams will dare to shoot. But that still requires Castle and Harper become 36-38% shooters, and the 5th guy on the floor to be a knockdown shooter (Barnes?) for that to be a comparable model.
I like Jaylen as a long term Castle comp though, thanks for raising it. Don't think we're close enough to push Castle to the 3 though (Castle is also a much better ball handler and distributor than Jaylen, so that's where the comp breaks down a bit)
I went and checked Bbref, and Jaylen hovered around 30% SF minutes recently, but played over 50% several seasons early on.
My apologies for the confusion, I was referring to 3P%, not time at the position
I paradigm shifted with a clutch. I knew what you were referring to, but circled back to the question of SF viability for Steph, based on a comparison with Jaylen, giving Jaylens history at the position.
Gotcha. Whether you call it a 3-guard lineup or one of Castle or Harper at SF... I think it's interesting and if I'm hypothetical GM, I'm asking the coaches, analytics and scouting teams what they think... but I'm guessing that the 3-point shooting will be the problem. If all three of those guys could get to 35% though (which I don't think is anywhere outside of the realm of possibility) then I think there might be something there, especially considering they'll probably only really all play together to start and end the game, other than that they'd be staggered. You'd need someone at the 4 who can shoot like Barnes but rebound and play pretty decent D (Santi?)
Harper could be better than Fox and Castle. You draft him and keep him. You'll have to add more size at the 4 when all three are on the floor. Team should be moving away from thinking Sochan is the solution at the 4.
Wemby can more than make up on the defensive end if Castle develops enough to be a starter at the 3.
Watching Orlando last night, I think Vassell is actually someone they could use.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions