Reply With Quote
Gross tbh
not that there has been any real reporting on it, but what about a trade back from 2 with a team like NOP or UTA where we go after Lauri or Murphy. we could still recoup 5 from Utah or 7 from NOP in this hypothetical trade
something like #2 + devin + keldon + sochan for lauri + sensebaugh + 5
then you'd still have 5 to get a legit prospect like one of bailey/tre johnson (or kon for those who like him) and 14 still available to get a forward who can defend
Gross tbh
The most valuable contract in the NBA is a top prospect on a rookie deal. Victor Wembanyama is making $13.4M this coming season. Let that sink in. It’s less than the MLE. Harper will be a similar value for his 4 years. A veteran will accelerate our payroll crunch,and shorten our window.
Top prospects on their second contract are good value too. Trading Harper is giving up value for 8 years, not just 4.
Amico aka human Centel, probably reads spurstalk and passes it off as reporting
When everyone is calling for your draft prospect it's best to keep it yourself.
We do need to turn over some roster spots but I am also hopeful some of our remaining rotation/role players will develop further and pay dividends re continuity and development. Like how D White blossomed on a strong BOS team.
We have our guards we need to invest in some bigs and to be honest with Fox, Castle, Harper, Keldon, Vassell - I just don’t see any reason to keep Blake or Branham. Both are SG and if I were them I would try to catch on a team that l could get a few minutes a game or at least a chance to get minutes or a backup role.
Also, don’t see us keeping any of our bigs as we need upgrade in a major way so either free agency or use our second and third picks to help out Wemby
There is a 3ed option
3. Trade #2 + assets for #1
Admittedly, this only works if DAL is not convinced that Flagg is on a completely different tier than Harper (and SAS is convinced that Flagg >>> Harper).
You asked the question which assets does Philly have, not if I'd do the trade. Stick to the topic. The Spurs would move down 1 spot, not 5. If their scouting department thinks Ace Bailey would pan out, picking up 3 future firsts for a front court player who's a better fit and has the same ceiling as Harper wouldn't be a bad move. Y'all act like Harper is the end all be all and I'm trading him for a pick in the late 20s.
There are people who think Bailey will be a bust and there are people who think he'll pan out. Your opinion ain't the only valid one in the world.
Do you realize that in this scenario I'm trading down 1 spot? Which means I'd still have the third pick. I'm not giving the pick away, I'm drafting another player in the top 3.
Doesn't matter considering that draft class situation.
Flagg is in his own tier, with Harper being a tier below.
Everyone else is at least another tier lower.
You lose more value by trading down from #2 to #3 than you would from #3 to #8.
Oh, man, this is shaping up to be one of the wildest Spurs' off-seasons ever. Maybe not much happens and the Spurs use the 2nd pick and use the 14th, or some of these crazy scenarios happen. A lot of posters are coming up with good ideas of what could be done. Interesting to see if any of them pan out.
This is going to be much, much tougher than the wait for the draft lottery was. I don't drink, but I might have to have a few drinks draft night.
There’s no one at 3 that is even 70% the prospect that Harper is.
Harper’s 50% outcome is high end starter/borderline AS. His 75% outcome is All NBA/borderline MVP. His 99% outcome is HOF.
Edgecombe’s 99% outcome is high end starter/borderline AS. It goes downhill from there in this draft.
I know that. I'm on record saying draft Harper. It's not that I'm a Harper hater, I'm simply bringing counter arguments that every FO has to consider when they evaluate prospects and their draft situation. I myself would pick Harper at #2 above anybody and I been saying this since we got the pick. But there are scouts out there who love Ace Bailey and think he's the second coming of T-Mac. Do I think that? No. Do the Spurs think that? We don't know.
Drafting Harper is the safest bet you can make. Which is why I want the Spurs to draft him, because if they don't, there's a huge chance of ing this up.
But I'm also on record saying that I can see the Spurs trading down if they get KD, if the return is huge and if they think there's somebody else in the top 10 with the same ceiling. And I think that's a fair scenario to consider if you trade for a 37-year old, who's still a top 15 player in the league. That's all.
God help anyone who believes that stupid . Mac had elite handles and was a gifted defender until he got to Orlando. Better chance Ace ends up Alfrederick Hughes than TMac. JFC if the Spurs FO is stupid enough to trade down when Bailey screams bust and Edgecombe and Tre Johnson give you the exact same fit problems Harper does without his crazy upside.
Looking more and more likely that the Spurs don’t land KD and they take Harper at 2. Things can change but right now this thread is aging like fine milk, tbh
So what does "win now" mean to you? At least the second round next year, and at least make a solid challenge for the Finals the next? What you seem to be saying is that this is no time for sentiment in personnel decisions. I totally agree, but I don't know if the Spurs organization is capable of that. You talk about "not giving guys another year to figure out what their role is". In win now mode, there's no room for players without well-defined roles, so I totally agree with that part.
This year, just like every other year proved two things: If you want to get to the Finals, you have to be able to win different ways (against different styles), and you have to play defense. Good defense. In the 2022 draft, I begged for the Spurs to grab Andrew Nembhard. (Most people here said he wasn't worthy of being drafted.) You see what his defense has been worth to the Pacers.
Regardless of what they do with the #2 pick, the Spurs need a good big man. I said in the 22 draft that Walker Kessler could easily wind up being the best C of that draft class. I don't have to list all the things he would do for the team you think the Spurs are trying to put together. And I don't want to get into compensation here, just needs. He doesn't have a lot of range on defense, but he's a solid inside presence, and he pretty consistently manages to put up his points. He started 58 games and averaged 30 minutes this season, so he isn't one of those guys who is only good in short bursts. And when other teams are able to go big (who do we know like that?) he would be a necessity. Kessler is one guy on your list that would be a solid pickup.
There's sort of a belief that the Spurs "can't" trade Fox, because it would look bad one season after bringing him in. Do you think that, or do you think they really could package him in a trade? If they could use him in a trade, would you be willing to do that and rely on Harper? There's a lot of value in having all your core be near the same age - for chemistry, but also for contract purposes.
I'm not crazy about the talk of "future draft picks" now that they have Wemby, Castle, and #2 (Harper). So many picks these days are protected, and late firsts or doesn't-convey picks aren't what they need to be in win now mode. Are they likely to pick up any players with late firsts that can compare to those three, or the free agents that will gravitate to a contender? I don't think so. The main thing is that kind of "future draft stock" doesn't seem really consistent with "win now". They caught lightning in a bottle with the picks they have in hand.
Good teams need role players too, but you're focusing on impact players and I don't want to muddy the waters discussing guys who would be good pickups for those roster spots, but there are a number of them out there that are well above common filler, and several of them stand to be budget friendly. Once again, win now means some known quan y role players is a better move than throwing darts at late draft picks. And guys who have actually been able to make an NBA roster are better than guys who *might* be able to step up from the G-League, but haven't so far.
None of that means anything if the Spurs aren't willing to make those kinds of choices.
Zeus, they cannot trade him after he forced his way to the Spurs. The Spurs would be screwed with agents going forward after Rich Paul did the Spurs a solid/favour getting him here. Any goodwill they had would be gone. Maybe in 2-3 years, but no way right now.
this is why I think the Maluach smoke is real. He's a center with a lot of upside and a standing reach 1 inch shorter than Wemby's. This is the #1 thing on the roster that they need to fix this offseason and they will.
The Fox trade was mainly put together by Rich Paul. You can't Fox and Rich Paul over just cause you can now draft Harper. And there's no neccesity to trade him either. You can have Fox play here for 4 years and trade him in 2029 when you have to extend Harper.There's sort of a belief that the Spurs "can't" trade Fox, because it would look bad one season after bringing him in. Do you think that, or do you think they really could package him in a trade? If they could use him in a trade, would you be willing to do that and rely on Harper? There's a lot of value in having all your core be near the same age - for chemistry, but also for contract purposes.
You need those picks for roster adjustments. Most players don't become free agents no more, you have to do trades or sign-and-trades for them to add them to your team. This is why the Nuggets and Bucks are stuck in the mud right now, because they don't have any picks left.I'm not crazy about the talk of "future draft picks" now that they have Wemby, Castle, and #2 (Harper). So many picks these days are protected, and late firsts or doesn't-convey picks aren't what they need to be in win now mode. Are they likely to pick up any players with late firsts that can compare to those three, or the free agents that will gravitate to a contender? I don't think so. The main thing is that kind of "future draft stock" doesn't seem really consistent with "win now". They caught lightning in a bottle with the picks they have in hand.
I was mainly saying that with the parity in the league and Victor still on a rookie contract, if you can add KD, you should pivot and try to make a run in those years. That means adding more established players to the roster and fixing all holes, like the rebounding issue, back up center, shooting, etc. Now that it looks like we might miss out on Durant, they won't have to fix everything at once. Although I still expect a trade for a starting 4 and signing or drafting a back up 5.Good teams need role players too, but you're focusing on impact players and I don't want to muddy the waters discussing guys who would be good pickups for those roster spots, but there are a number of them out there that are well above common filler, and several of them stand to be budget friendly. Once again, win now means some known quan y role players is a better move than throwing darts at late draft picks. And guys who have actually been able to make an NBA roster are better than guys who *might* be able to step up from the G-League, but haven't so far.
None of that means anything if the Spurs aren't willing to make those kinds of choices.
I start a thread about this awhile back, you should be able to find it if you search “continuity rate”
This is also a slightly different measurement, since my thread calculated a “reverse continuity rate” (which is how much of the roster’s minute returned the following season) whereas this is how many of the current seasons minutes were filled by players on the roster the previous season (subtle, but key difference): https://www.basketball-reference.com...ontinuity.html
See my last reply to LeBowen if this topic interests you
TM3+7+all the MIL swaps they have? I’d need the think about that
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
