HoopsHype: Spurs' DeMar DeRozan 'possibly could be on the trade block' for Lakers

[sasaint]

Still wouldn't be as stupid as trading s bag, Green and $5M for DeRozan, Poeltl and the 29th pick (was always going to be 27-30).

I doubt even they'd do it as a last resort and I doubt even more so that the Spurs would have the balls to go through with it.

It's not like anything new was learned about DeRozan since the trade, so if they prioritized him over a package of picks less than a year ago, why would they trade him for a single one now? Especially when the likely pick would be a role player (the most valuable and scarce kind, but still).

I think they learned first-hand how his emotions can get the better of him, causing him to lose focus and effectiveness. He is prone to antics during games that are very un-Spurs-like. They learned that.

[TD 21]

I think they learned first-hand how his emotions can get the better of him, causing him to lose focus and effectiveness. He is prone to antics during games that are very un-Spurs-like. They learned that.

If they did, they weren't paying attention because that's something they should have known beforehand.

Deep down, I don't think they're thrilled with him (between what you mention and his abandoning the 3; though they enabled it), but I think their being obsessed with upholding their image would supersede what's best for the franchise in the end.

There's also the possible (probable?) trickle down effect. Trade him for a rookie and are Aldridge and Gay still committed? That shouldn't matter, but we know making the playoffs at all costs is priority number one.

[DPG21920]

If they did, they weren't paying attention because that's something they should have known beforehand.

Deep down, I don't think they're thrilled with him (between what you mention and his abandoning the 3; though they enabled it), but I think their being obsessed with upholding their image would supersede what's best for the franchise in the end.

There's also the possible (probable?) trickle down effect. Trade him for a rookie and are Aldridge and Gay still committed? That shouldn't matter, but we know making the playoffs at all costs is priority number one.

SA made the playoffs without DeRozan or Kawhi. If they add Poeltl, White busting out and Lonnie to that team plus draft picks, no reason to think they still couldn’t be a playoff team.

[TD 21]

SA made the playoffs without DeRozan or Kawhi. If they add Poeltl, White busting out and Lonnie to that team plus draft picks, no reason to think they still couldn’t be a playoff team.

With Aldridge and Gay and presuming they don't fall off a cliff, I agree. I'm skeptical the front office would see it that way though and even if they do, again I think upholding their image would supersede what's best for the franchise.

[CGD]

All you would have to do is agree to the trade by the draft and consummate it during free agency.

This is my understanding. And the Lakers would still be the team technically picking at 4, then the whole deal goes into effect at start of FA.

Now, Lakers could send back someone like Ball (not saying I want) and then still have about 18M in cap for another big signing.

[CGD]

If Lakers won't take DeRozan for 4th pick but would accept DeRozan and 19th for the 4th - would you do it if DeAndre Hunter is available?

Seems a little rich. DDR is a really good player, notwithstanding some of the limits in his game. I’d do 29, or, if 19, see if I could get something else too.

[palangi]

What if we gave them DDR, Bertans, and the 29th pick
For
4 and Brandon Ingram

They might look to get rid of Ingram and his blood clots. His value is definitely down
The 4th pick could be used on Culver or reddish (who I believe can play the 2.

[james evans]

i have no idea what anyone sees in Brandon Ingram. I've never saw anything in him since high school. He played for Kinston. I've seen a lot of guys come from Kinston over the years and the only reason he was dominant there is due to him being nearly 7 foot tall shooting over guys about my height. He was no Stackhouse when he was there. And neither was Reggie Bullock(also his teammate on the lakers).

[Chinook]

i have no idea what anyone sees in Brandon Ingram. I've never saw anything in him since high school. He played for Kinston. I've seen a lot of guys come from Kinston over the years and the only reason he was dominant there is due to him being nearly 7 foot tall shooting over guys about my height. He was no Stackhouse when he was there. And neither was Reggie Bullock(also his teammate on the lakers).

I certainly wouldn't pay extra to get him in the bargain. If the Spurs managed to trade DMDR for 4, you use 4 to take the SF, 19 to take the scoring wing and 29 on a big. There's no need to try to swing someone else in the exchange.

[palangi]

i have no idea what anyone sees in Brandon Ingram. I've never saw anything in him since high school. He played for Kinston. I've seen a lot of guys come from Kinston over the years and the only reason he was dominant there is due to him being nearly 7 foot tall shooting over guys about my height. He was no Stackhouse when he was there. And neither was Reggie Bullock(also his teammate on the lakers).

Whether you like him or not there is talent there. And we have a massive hole at SF. Im still for taking a SF with the 19th pick too okpala or Roby

[CGD]

Is October the deadline by which extensions must be completed?

This all really turns on whether DDR and Spurs can agree on something this summer, so it will be interesting to see what tidbits we learn early on (I did find it interesting that Pop recently said he will expect DDR to expand his game to include the 3). I don’t see the spurs wanting to go through that circus again.

[mo7888]

Whether you like him or not there is talent there. And we have a massive hole at SF. Im still for taking a SF with the 19th pick too okpala or Roby

In your scenario, who would you take at 4?

[palangi]

I certainly wouldn't pay extra to get him in the bargain. If the Spurs managed to trade DMDR for 4, you use 4 to take the SF, 19 to take the scoring wing and 29 on a big. There's no need to try to swing someone else in the exchange.

I agree we need to draft a small forward. But if we could get Ingram to fill the hole to develop or flip later why not?

[palangi]

In your scenario, who would you take at 4?

I would look at Jarrett Culver or Cameron Reddish (who I believe can play the 2 or Jaxon Hayes

[mo7888]

I agree we need to draft a small forward. But if we could get Ingram to fill the hole to develop or flip later why not?

If we are drafting a sf at 4 (hunter or reddish), bringing in Ingram, and taking a sf at 19 then we are over supplying that position by a good bit. If they want to give Ingram and we can flip him then ok, otherwise I'd rather go with our sf from the #4 pick.

[CGD]

Whether you like him or not there is talent there. And we have a massive hole at SF. Im still for taking a SF with the 19th pick too okpala or Roby

I agree that these picks need to go toward addressing the SF slot, especially with LMA and Portle still around. If a framework of DDR for 4 is out there, I wouldn’t mind giving up some value to take a look at Ingram in a different setting. plus even if he does well next year I don’t see the big RFA offersheet that would scare the spurs off, and if he sucks you move on, and hopefully their wasn’t that much of a cost (e.g., 29).

RE bigs: It feels like there will be Brook Lopez and Al Hortford types in the open market for years to come.

[palangi]

If we are drafting a sf at 4 (hunter or reddish), bringing in Ingram, and taking a sf at 19 then we are over supplying that position by a good bit. If they want to give Ingram and we can flip him then ok, otherwise I'd rather go with our sf from the #4 pick.

I wouldn't take a SF at 4. I would take Culver or Reddish tip play at the 2. Then take a more development type PF at 19 like Okpala or Roby

PG- Murray, white
SG- Culver, Walker
SF- Ingram, Okpala

[weebo]

The Lakers aren't trading with the Spurs

[palangi]

Well they are getting new management. And they need to appease bron.
But if you have a crystal ball then...

[CGD]

The Lakers aren't trading with the Spurs

Maybe not and I’d probably prefer to trade for Beal if I were them, but if I’m the Lakers I’m not banking on the free agent market alone. Trades have to be in the mix.

Their choices could come down to the Middleton, Harris, and Hortford teir for free agents. Certainly not bad, but not what they’re trying to sell to the fan base.

[BackHome]

More likely Spurs aren’t trading with the Flakers.

[tholdren]

Whether you like him or not there is talent there. And we have a massive hole at SF. Im still for taking a SF with the 19th pick too okpala or Roby

Its all media hype. There is no talent.

[palangi]

Its all media hype. There is no talent.

Ok?

[SAGirl]

I think they learned first-hand how his emotions can get the better of him, causing him to lose focus and effectiveness. He is prone to antics during games that are very un-Spurs-like. They learned that.

What about Pop saying this is a new team with a new culture... Etc. What about him saying they plan to bring back the same core ? I am pessimistic in that I don't think Pop is looking to deal him for a youngin.

[TimDunkem]

They care more about DeRozan being happy - meaning making him a core piece - than improving the team.

Too bad they didn't take the same approach with the man who just led the Craptors to the Finals on a gimpy leg.