Reply With Quote
Right now LJC Ceiling is Human Victory Cigarette
Right now LJC Ceiling is Human Victory Cigarette
It's really hard to refute that a risk makes sense or not. There are reasons independent of their current level of play to put LJC above the second-best of the UDFAs. But this whole, "He'll be Ian in nine years" argument sucks. You know who won't be Ian in nine years? The UDFAs. If LJC is going to be a starting-level big in nine years, sign me the up. But if he's even going to be a fifth big/energy type in his fourth season like Ian was for Dallas, that's more than worth keeping him.
If you want to play semantics games over "prospect", go play with yourself.It's not semantics. Dedmon is being signed to be the backup center. LJC wasn't brought in to be in the rotation this year and probably not next. If Dedmon fails, the Spurs are in a hole; if Livio fails, no one cares except people like you trying to PMS on people you disagreed with. That is the difference between a rotation player and a low-level prospect. Get over it.
Now is Dedmon a question mark? Yes. He has to fit a role that's been mainly projected, same as Anderson. But those guys are going to be in the rotation. The team isn't just hoping they "develop"'; they NEED them to.
No they ing don't. The Warriors carried Looney all year last season despite him being hurt. They're doing the same thing with Jones this season. The Cavs picked up Liggins and McRae last season. OKC had Huestis. The Raptors had Bruno. It's simply not true that teams care about having 15th men who are rotation-calibre. They don't, really, because most don't rest their starters like the Spurs do.All teams don't have 15 live roster spots? You're right. But good teams do. If I remember, you're one of the ones who has insisted that the Spurs are still going to be good this year. Pick a side.
You want to about LJC? Be my guest. But it's idiotic to try to force d-leaguers on the roster ahead of him before he's even had a training camp. Is he likely to bust? Yes, on virtue of being a late-first, and on him already having a major injury and on him being 22 and not established yet. But expecting him to be Dedmon in order to call him worthy is just out of touch with the reality of NBA projects and the Spurs' situation. You need to address that before you go around trying to put folks on blast.
First off, you're almost certainly right that the Spurs are going to stand pat. It's what they do. The counterpoint to your post above is that the typical "he sucks, get rid of him" people aren't the only ones on ST saying he stinks. Judging a prospect so soon after signing him accomplishes a lot, but only if the team can bring in a useful player now. Otherwise there's plenty of time to evaluate him, and they can get rid of him almost at any point by any method.
I'm not sure I agree with your predictions being anything other than wildly optimistic. Let's say he takes 2 to 4 years to become Al Farouq Aminu, which means he grows two inches and is ready to average a timely 10 and 6 off the bench. Some people, including me, would say that it's not worth the roster spot for a guy who might look like an NBA player someday if (again IF) there's someone good that the Spurs can have in his place. Maybe we haven't reached that point yet, and it's looking like the Spurs might be moving someone. This could get interesting, though it probably won't.
I didn't say Joseph should be cut. I defended him. I didn't say Mahinmi was trash. I defended him. But I watched all three players in summer league, and it looks that LJC may be two years from looking like a D league player. Mahinmi's PER in summer league was 15. LJC's was 3. There is simply no comparison. Jean-Charles has not been rough, or a work in progress, he has pretty much sucked against summer league talent for two years, something decent NBA players don't often do.
Also have to remember that he's only 6'9". The reality is that by year 4 he's a Jeff Ayres type player. That may not be why people on ST think he's potentially less valuable than his roster spot, but it's damn sure why I think so. As I said, it's really unlikely to come up.
In your eyes, what kind of commitment have the Spurs made that hasn't been fulfilled by signing him to a guaranteed contract? He is guaranteed more money this season than most people will ever earn, and he can go ply his trade in Europe and continue to make a good living.
As for your projections for the 2017-18 season, they are fairly optimistic regarding Forbes and Garino - possibly even Arci. Not every free agent is so committed to playing for the Spurs that they would decline another offer to remain in Austin or Europe.
As I suggested earlier, LJC wouldn't even see the floor for Kentucky or Duke or Carolina. Why in the world would he play in the NBA. His opportunity cost to the Spurs is too high. Ignoring (for the moment) the 4 or 5 guys vying for the 15th spot, I bet there are several young guys who get waived by other teams in training camp who would be much better than LJC.
Last edited by sasaint; 08-28-2016 at 12:19 PM.
A lot of big heads don't like Fathead.Everytime I read fat head I still bust out ing laughing
Very true. I hope the Spurs decide NOW whether they will pay to bring him back. If they bring him back, I am fine with that. But if they aren't willing to pay him, then trade him now when his value is very high after his performance in Rio. What I don't want is for Patty to walk and the Spurs get nothing for him.
Last edited by sasaint; 08-28-2016 at 01:41 PM.
That's true and he hasn't had a good pay day. Neither have Dedmon or Simmons for that matter. Spurs need to evaluate after the season is over which direction they are heading. Obviously how guys played RS and playoffs will matter but also how they want to build the team and who they want to prioritize.
I mention Aminu as a comp which is probably on the high side for LJC. My point is that the Spurs invested a 1st on him, he is being payed next to nothing by NBA standards for the next two seasons, after that his contract isn't guaranteed. If the Spurs don't see him progressing how they like after two years they can cut bait but doing so now would be silly.
Point taken on the minority of ST and how they talk about prospects, its a pet peeve of mine. I had my doubts about Cojo, though I could see NBA skills. He didn't seem to be able to put it all together until year 4, by then the same people who were calling him D-Leagues were saying that he should have been kept over Mills.
LJC hasn't done well is summer league this season, he did better last year though until he was taken out due to injury.
I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt here because PATFO obviously thought him valuable enough to sign him to a rookie contract. He's got elite level athleticism that I am guessing is the reason PATFO have been so high on him. What I wonder though is that I thought he was more like a SF, but it seems that he's going to play PF.
I am not exactly giving PATFO the benefit of the doubt, but as a Spurs fan, I hope I am wrong about LJC. In today's NBA of "positionless basketball" I think he is PF-ish but projects to get a little time against some larger SFs and possibly even play some small ball C.
Let's just say I really don't think Mills is a guy they should prioritize. He will command salary for a 6th man and won't be worth it, unless the cap keeps rising at this astronomic rate. Maybe it will continue to do that and all this coversation will become ridiculous and academic, but since you are mentioning it will only rise once more, then that raises my concerns with Mills.
When Manu was the 6h man, he carried scrubs. You'd give him a semblance of teammates and he'd make them better and make himself go. Mills last season had a terrific bench with an aged but still productive Manu, his friend Bobo and Dwest. When Manu went down for parts of the season, the guy who increased his production and was coming up with 4-7 assists a game was Anderson. That's just the truth. He was the one setting others and Mills up. He was also the best bench rebounder, drew the assignment on the most difficult targets, came up with 3-5 steals some games, and a block. He was the best all around player in the bench for most of the games when Manu was out. Sure there were times that Mills got hot and had a productive 20+ point shooting night and outscored Anderson but no one who is not an Anderson hater will tell you Mills was the best player of the two. And then there were all those 1-7 or 2-11 shooting nights for Mills and when those happen, he doesn't give you anything else. In the OKC series he had the ball in his hands most posessions and averaged 4 PPG and the bench struggled to score, that's bc he doesn't draw a double team, and doesn't draw fouls since he doesn't get in the paint.
Sure, I like Mills well enough. He's short and bc of that won't present a decent contest on anybody, and tall bench guards like Jamal Crawford, Austin Rivers, Livingston and even others who have less size but are more athletic can overpower him, post him up, blow by him, etc. But I like his effort and due to that, he comes up with loose balls that others deflect and comes up with rebounds when others box out, bc he's not lazily ball-watching the action and he keeps active. I like that. His energy is maybe what separates Mills from many other tiny SG like Cotton. I'd keep him but not if he's overpriced. That is where I have issues. Like so many guys who got overpriced this past summer he won't produce enough for a high contract, and I'd hate it if the overpayment of Mills then makes them lose on someone else (the opportunity cost part of my argument), or if they then have to dump his contract like they did Diaw's and Tiago's because they decide to move on in a different direction the following summer after they rewarded him with his contract.
Since I have my favorites just like everyone else I will put this out there and let the hate brigade do their thing, since they do their thing anyways. The guy the Spurs need to prioritize retaining is Anderson in 2 seasons. He's looked like the guy who can make others better, who will find cutters, who will throw lobs to energy guys who run ahead, who will craft his own shot under duress and who will draw fouls deceptively when the team is in a scoring drought. He is 6'9" rebounds well, defends well, has a high BBIQ and was barely 22 this season. He's far from his prime and will continue to get better and will still be far from his prime at the start of his post rookie contract, which means he will likely be worth his contract health permitting, and might outperform it too. Spurs can at least engage his agent this next summer about an extension. I don't think they will sign him to one, bc they probably want to retain the roster flexibility, but he will get paid in 2 seasons. Playmaking forwards, who rebound, defend and shoot a 3 are at a premium nowadays. Kyle can make the bench work with any Forbes' like shooter. You don't need to overpay guys like Mills if you have Kyle. That's how I see it. Part of the reason Kyle hasn't repeated his SL performances in the big leagues is that the ball is not in his hands, the system is not about him, he plays off other ppl, and he was being made to earn his role. Which has worked out for the Spurs, bc Kawhi did the same. He didn't come in and in his first real season with the team was given the ball and told to go to work. He was instead allowed to become a better shooter and better overall player playing off other people b4 he was thrown into that role and the same is true for Kyle. Spurs are allowing him to improve in every facet b4 he's really thrown into the fray like that but he's grown up as a player in just a single season and is still developing. Sure, there are still ladders he needs to climb to but at 22, he can climb them. Mills is pretty much in his prime already and will remain the same. If overpaying Mills then places the Spurs in a spot that they can't retain their young players the following offseason then I would pass on that (I'd throw Bertans there too, because it's possible that he's just as good of a shooter as Mills is and he's also younger, taller, with an overall higher ceiling--if only bc of his size. He just needs to remain healthy). But anyways, that's just me and everyone is allowed to have a favorite.
Now hate Trolls: Go! (just don't cite me bc I have you on ignore, you know who you are).
By the way, do you know who had a better playoffs than Mills as the 6th man off the bench? Cojo!
Fathead is a blackhole on offense. Like literally. when someone brings up fathead and a good offensive player, I can't take you serious.
And Mills isn't just some short shooter. He is an international player. He is worth his stock. Unlike all these other ty guards.
He won't be traded in Manu's farewell tour. They were even sad to have to trade Diaw. I am starting to think he's re-signed, then goes the way of Diaw and Tiago, traded when the following season they want to move a different direction.
Could you explain how Manu's "farewell tour" renders Patty exempt from a trade? Also, you have either a much clearer crystal ball than I or great contacts within the Spurs' organization. Who was sad to have to trade Diaw? Pop was mad that he coasted all season - so mad that he finally benched him. But sad to trade him? Idk.
Dedmon is a fourth big; a role I don't see them spending big on.
Simmons is a fringe player. Maybe he establishes himself as more next season, but I don't see them spending big on a player that doesn't project as a top three wing and has some overlap with Murray.
Mills is obviously a different kind of 6th man than Ginobili and that comparison, for obvious reasons, is foolish for any bench player. No one can truly replace Ginobili, of course, but they can sign Teodosic or Vasquez to fill the role short term and hopefully Murray can long term. Mills can work fine next to any.
I could understand not wanting to break the bank for Mills, but it can't just be assumed that some nobody like Forbes can replace him. Besides, the back court is already underwhelming. People get so caught up in "getting younger", but this is a franchise still trying to contend for championships. To do that, they're going to need more than three prime players and five proven commodities.
SAGirl, you and I have seen eye-to-eye about Kyle from the beginning. Haters will still hate him when he is a 10/5/5 rotation player - perhaps even a starter. So, this one (like all of your Kyle write ups) is. But I am not sure I agree with your assessment of Patty. You did see how he has bulked up, didn't you? I think that is likely to help him a lot on the defensive side of the ball. And on offense, he is a full season removed from shoulder surgery, and his shooting touch should be better than last season, his "recovery" year. I admit, though, that I hadn't really thought about Patty in light of Bertans' arrival. While Bertans might replace Patty's long range threat, he will not replace him as a ball-handler. Like it or not, he is still our de facto backup PG. And I haven't even touched on his leadership/locker room skill - especially on a team that is facing a leadership hole once Manu hangs 'em up. Really Patty and Kyle are the best leaders we have looking toward the future.
Last edited by sasaint; 08-28-2016 at 04:43 PM.
True.
I think the issue with LJC is that he stalled or regressed on his development. He doesn't peeve me personally bc he was a good prospect when he was picked. The 2013 draft was a crapshoot which required teams to do a lot of guesswork and pretty much everyone was a project of some sort. He was a high upside guy considering his size, athleticism, the Nike Hoop Summit 2013 and his age. He just didn't develop and one wonders about that. There are guys who fall on that category every season. They stand out at a young age when they are superior athletes (Anthony Bennet, Cliff Alexander, etc there are others), but they then don't develop any skill other than just being a tall athlete and that is not enough. Three years later guys of his generation have developed and he has not.
I hope he develops into at least a good roleplayer that can help the Spurs at some point while he's under contract, but he has a lot to work on. He is going to need to be more impactful defensively than he has been and needs at least a midrange shot (the last statement was per Becky).
Joseph was a 10.4 PPG scorer in college. 42.2% FG.
Lol They reportedly wanted to keep Diaw and couldn't. I threw the sad part there, but they were not shopping him until they absolutely had to do that to get Gasol. I wouldn't think Mills would be exempted from a trade but I suspect that's how it is. That's a speculation. In reality you are right. Manu got himself a huge payday and if breaking in Murray or someone else instead of Mills is what's due for this season, he ought to be fine with that, but Pop and not altering chemistry and his yada, yada preference for continuity made me think they will try to keep Mills unless it becomes too onerous (salary demands and offers from other teams they are unwilling to match) or unless some team makes an outrageous offer like Mills and Simmons for Noel, Okafor or some surpluses young guy in one of the tanking teams somewhere who just have more young prospects than they know what to do with.
Last edited by SAGirl; 08-28-2016 at 06:37 PM.
sasaint you make a good point about Mills. I agree with what you state about his leadership and the camaraderie that he fosters. Also, I agree he and Kyle have leadership qualities the team needs. The only thing that throws me up for a loop is really what kind of money are we talking about with him and really at that point how that affects the Spurs in the future. One cannot avoid the possibility at some point Tony is going to be benched. Are the Spurs going to start Mills? Is that why he's bulked up?
If he were a starter then the amount of his contract would be commensurate with his role and I won't say a peep. Are the Spurs a championship team with Mills starting? What about Dijon? Might not matter bc he's cheap right now and needs to develop, but there is just a lot there that can't be known right now. Maybe in the end that is why they won't consider a Mills trade, they want to let it all play out then make a choice, but as you said, in that case they will pay him whatever just to keep the asset. It may work out just fine depending on cap increases too.
A lot of this is really speculative at this point.
The reversal by that crowd was extremely funny. Some people just want to about something.
As I said, the only reason to give up on LJC now would be if the Spurs can find someone that can actually fill the rotation. They would be unlikely to do it, even less so to do it for an Argie who has never played NBA ball. As disappointing as he's looked, he really looks like a blown pick. Hope to that I"m wrong about that.
If it wasn't for this, Spurstalk wouldn't exist.Some people just want to about something.
Thanks, T Park. Yeah, I think I was most interested in finding out if he had been slotted for a specific role with the Spurs, yet. The last article I read, which was in early August, stated that Monty's role was still being determined. Pop told him to take as much of a role with the organization as he feels comfortable...that the Spurs had opened the door to either a coaching and player-development role or a front-office position (or a hybrid), depending on what he prefers.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions