Reply With Quote
[QUOTE=K...;11227486]I didn't think either one was very likely to 'leave me alone and I thought they were both trash candidates.. if you think otherwise...that's cool with me..
Could you dorks shove it about politics. Don't you have family members to annoy on facebook?
[QUOTE=K...;11227486]I didn't think either one was very likely to 'leave me alone and I thought they were both trash candidates.. if you think otherwise...that's cool with me..
Fair point....
You shouldn't have made political posts if you don't want to talk politics.
I didn't say she pushed it.... I'm perfectly fine with your assertion that the right pushed that on her, but I can still say that any campaign with an ounce of sense would have countered to make that issue irrelevant.
It's like saying Breaking News "political dirty politics " at 10.... everybody knows it's coming, they all do it, it's how you respond and play the game that determines winners and losers.
That's very true and I yield on that point... I always try to avoid these conversations because they're kinda pointless because nobody argues to sharpen their own view anymore. They argue to push whatever agenda they have (either left or right). I don't know why I thought a middle of the road approach would move anyone to 'think'. That was my mistake. I'll try to avoid that in the future... Peace out...
So she should have thrown LGBT under the bus because Trump manufactured an outrage? I ing hate Harris, I hate Biden, I hate Pelosi, Jeffries, Clyburn, Schumer and all these right wing s that have dragged the Democrats from being a labor party under FDR to neoliberal stooges kissing up to the billionaire ruling class since Bill Clinton but trans athletes isn't why she lost. Having a right wing status quo neoliberal economic agenda that inspired nobody did it.
My last post on this:
I'm glad we agree...I hate them all too...
It's valid discussion. I don't want trump messing up who is available in this draft. Spurs need Malauch eligible and available draft night to clutter up the range SA may be selecting in and knock some other prospects down to San Antonio. I like Malauch but I've never called for Spurs to draft him. But that's 100% about basketball fit and nothing else. Even still, he is intriguing as a wemby backup possibility you can't completely rule out just yet but I'm meh on it. I just don't see Malauch as very complimentary alongside Wemby and think his hype would make his cost production ratio unacceptable in San Antonio.
lol Malauch should arrange a deal with Toronto Raptors and uh I guess only play home games but still it would be a hilarious troll from Canada lol but yeah I guess you wouldn't ever be able to travel across so it wouldn't work.
We should definitely want Maluach to be in this draft (and Demin too). If nothing more than pushing players we like better down a spot. It just increases our odds...
I’m not big on Maluach he just looked slow to me. Same old dilemma of too high a pick to waste on a backup center. Don’t mind Demin at the ATL pick, but I’d have a hard time taking him over Fleming. That still makes a backup center a decent play in round 2 unless we trade off Vassell or Keldon.
Really not liking this draft for likely Spurs spots.
Sorber looks like a stiff, kind of like Tony Bradley. Kon looks severely under 6-7, and too unathletic and not a starter, I might be too harsh on him but he might be off the board by their pick anyway. McNeely I don't take that seriously in the NBA. Queen gives me Caleb Swanigan vibes, but no shooting, r.i.p.
So I'm kind of pro-Flemming by default. I think he's low ceiling, zero on ball juice, looked good playing a schedule full of scrubs that was hard to not look good against.
So at best he's a play finisher, dunks and threes, plus rim protection and active hands with nice size.
And that could be an eventual starter on a team with Wemby, Fox, and Castle to do the on-ball work.
Barnes gets credit for shooting 3s while not rebounding or defending ... Fleming could fill in cheaper.
And, if you compare him to someone like Patrick Williams. Who I was way too high on, big time wrong about. But it was COVID season so no tourney, no combine, etc
Anyway Williams just got overpaid, BUT why couldn't Fleming be a better Williams? Williams shoots threes decently for his career and has a rep as a solid but not great man defender and that's it. He's a poor rebounder, doesn't want the ball, can't create, can't defend smaller guys, had missed a ton of dunks this season .... And sounds like even without the bulls contract could have gotten a mid level deal.
If Fleming can just be a play finisher who creates events on defense, that's a nice player to have.
Some thoughts on the later pick...
I dont think Sorber is stiff. Sorber looks stiff if you are viewing him through the lens of a PF, which he isn't. Backup C is a legitimate need for us. And there's a world where Wemby's perimeter game continues developing to the point where he can coexist with somebody like Sorber.
Fleming definitely feels like a gamble because he doesnt have a great ceiling and frankly doesnt have a great floor either (low level of compe ion, only one year of good shooting, with the caveat that he's improved every year) but he does check a ton of boxes, and has a ready-made NBA body and athleticism. The things he is bad at are things that we aren't really banking on him developing anyway. It's not like Castle and his shooting. Really just need him to continue being good at the things he is good at. That's why im in favor taking him. I think ideally you can get him with the Hawks pick, but i wouldnt be mad if we took him at 8 or 9. If he's there with the Hawks pick, I'm hoping they sprint to the podium.
With the later pick, Carter Bryant is the upside pick, as an athletic 2-way wing with size, athleticism. But what exactly would his role be early on? What would he be expected to do offensively? Not sure. He's a lump of clay but an enticing one.
Nique Clifford is an interesting one, but you always need to be cautious with older college players. he's nearly 2 years older than sochan. but he has solid size/athleticism for a sg/sf and has been a do-it-all player. can drive and finish at the rim, has a midrange game, is a solid passer, has improved his 3pt shooting, solid defense, and exceptional rebounding. I think he should go in the 20's though, to a team that just needs a solid year 1 contributor for a playoff team.
I'm also still buying McNeeley stock. His abysmal end to his campaign has made him cheaper. Midseason he was getting mocked around the late top 10, basically in the spot now held by Kon. He's nto a candidate with the Hawks pick. I'm bullish on the shot translating.
Essengue feels like a spurs-y pick but man im not sure now is the time to commit to developing players who are jump shot challenged.
I'm pretty out on CMB/Newell but i could see the Spurs being high on them.
Last edited by spurraider21; 04-07-2025 at 12:24 AM.
i mean yeah, falling to 10th pick would suck. with that said this isnt the worst version of the board. i dont think the spurs would or should show much interest in Queen, Maluach, or Jakucionis anyway, so them off the board is fine. the best talent on the board here might be Fears, but thats an exceptionally poor fit right now. i dont understand the Jase Richardson love personally.
see my post above for guys i like in this 10+ range
I think 6 players are sure gone before we pick. Tre and Jaku have the star upside and positional size. The field is nipple, malauch, CMB, egor, queen, fears and jase. The rest have no all defense or 1-2 option upside to me and not worthy of a lottery selection.
https://nbadraft.theringer.com/
Updated today.
Carter Bryant at 6 is a choice
Nice write up, thank you.
I say this as someone who is admittedly quite down on this draft outside of the very top, but this draft looks better if you assume anyone in our range will have to go through the typical rookie treatment pre-Sochan: significant G-League time, limited minutes for most of the season, don't expect much until year 2 or 3. A lot more players seem like viable options once you no longer expect them to contribute much next year (Essengue being a prime example)
yeah i dont think the draft is particularly deep or amazing, but anything compared to last year is nice. i'd say depth wise its pretty average. i think the expectation that any pick in the lottery is going to be dripping with obvious all star upside is a fantasy. you are wanting good role players who can become good starters. i think this class delivers that.
last year you had freaking Salaun going #6 overall. didnt like him last year, but if he was in this year's draft i dont think he'd be worth a top 20 pick at all. i like sorber as a center prospect better than anybody last year other than Clingan. any of the top 4 guys probably go #1 last year. im not particularly high on them, but other than buzelis, you didnt have any defensive oriented forwards that have the prowess of CMB, Newell, or even somebody like Carter Bryant. after buzelis, who was the next forward taken last year with plus defense? Dadiet to the knicks?
i think this is a fairly typical draft in the scheme of things, but with Flagg as a stronger than normal #1 overall
Haven't gotten into his defensive stats and was he picked before buzelis, but ron holland didn't do to bad this year. Stating just because around this time last year there were very few holland supporters, and probably none who would choose holland over reed. If spurs are having to choose between a kon/sheppard type player vs. someone who's athletic and physically marks all the boxes but still needs developing, I'm rolling the dice on the higher reward.
i liked holland a lot (had him over castle at the time of the draft). but i said after buzelis because i wanted to speak to the relative depth of the classes and holland went top 5
I'm still intrigued by the Fleming archetype from what skills he has reported to possess. It sounds like a perfect fit next to Wemby, and arguably, Sochan. IF (!!) Fleming can actually hit open 3s, that really opens up possibilities. I mean, if Castle's shot becomes at least average, you could try starting Sochan
alongside Fleming and have a real defensive presence. I still think a defensive iden y is the way to go, especially with the greater challenge of molding an offense to fit around Wemby's freelancing style.
I agree on one hand and disagree on another in comparing this year's draft to last (if we exclude Flagg and Harper, who are clearly a tier above anyone from last year). I think overall they grade out pretty equivalently, but I feel like last year's draft had more immediate contributors than last year's class. With that said, this year's class might have more long-term contributors after they go through the proper developmental paths. I think both drafts are below average, and not typical... to the point where I wonder about what's going on in the amateur ranks. The increased propensity of players from foreign leagues in the lottery may be less about those leagues generating more prospects and more about how far NCAA basketball has fallen.
Fair point!
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
