Derozan on the trading block??

[DAF86]

He was more efficient, tbf. Shot above 48% after shooting in the low-mid 40s all his years in TOR. Also had his best year as a playmaker and on defense. I doubt they've given up on him. He really wouldn't be that bad if he would just stop caring about his scorer/closer label.

And yet, with all those improvements, he still failed to trully be a positive impact player, like all-star level players are suppossed to be.

[weebo]

Y'all need to calm your s down...he ain't going anywhere.

[RC_Drunkford]

I'm convinced PATFO thought DeRozan would be better than what he is. Or, at least, that they could transform him into a more efficient player. For sure PATFO thought they would be better than a 48 wins team when they traded for him, so it's not like their offseason predictions were on point last season, tbh.

but they supposedly built that team for Kawhi, so this is the first offseason where they can build the team around DeRozan and LA.

[Dennis the Menace]

If you aren’t going to win a championship this year and you aren’t going to extend the guy, then trade him for draft picks and expiring contracts.

LOL at trading the best player on Earth and closest thing to MJ for Jakob Poetl and Keldon Johnson.

Get draft picks for Derozan. You’re not winning it all with him and he’s gonna walk. Just strive for draft picks

[slick'81]

Y'all need to calm your s down...he ain't going anywhere.

Yea summer of '21 here we come. It still be fun seeing this go 20 pages and all the crazy scenarios ala the belli thread

[DAF86]

but they supposedly built that team for Kawhi, so this is the first offseason where they can build the team around DeRozan and LA.

Pop's comment about being better than the previous season were Made when they had already traded for DeRozan.

[Dennis the Menace]

I mean seriously, when a Derozan walks next year that opens up cap space. But WTF is this outdated, small market team going to do with the cap space? Some of y’all act like that cap space will be used on some next level type players. Remind me how often/likely that is going to occur.

Get some draft picks for Derozan. We draft and develop, it’s what we do best and about the only thing we do well.

[spurraider21]

I wonder WTF is wrong with people so much nowadays...

The Spurs aren't trading DeRozan. You don't have to move everyone just because they are (or rather might be) expiring. You can let guys go or keep your options open. At what point do you no longer care if a guy walks? They didn't "get something" for Anderson or Parker. There's a very good chance they don't even try to "get something" for Aldridge. Guys can walk for nothing. It's okay. The whole point of DeRozan was to bridge the previous and future eras. He's doing that job well. He wasn't brought in to be a mainstay for a decade. He can play out this year and potentially next, and then the two sides can part ways feeling like they both got what they wanted.

It's definitely not easy to see how the Spurs will get better next year unless their guards take an unrealistic jump and the team gets actual value in a deal. If they wanted to trade him for a pick, it would have been during the draft when they knew what they'd be getting. Almost no other trade makes any sense. Some of the deals proposed here are just miserable.

really not buying those comparisons. anderson was making peanuts on a rookie deal. what value were we going to get in a trade where the salaries matchup up? unless another team was just so high on anderson that they were willing to throw picks for him, a trade was never going to work out. its why trading forbes doesnt make much sense now. you're not going to get equal player value at a 3 mil salary (unless another team wants him a part of a bigger package, but again, that's a very different calculus than we'd be considering with demar)

and parker was one of the worst players in the league while being grossly overpaid. demar isn't what the spurs need, and is a poor fit, but he's significantly more attractive than TP was in his last year here

[RVSTX]

I think Murray can improve from 8ppg, and White can improve also. they are both very good defensively already. We already lost Davis for nothing, I dont want to lose derozan for nothing either...whats the use of having cap space if we cant sign a tier 1 or 2 free agent...

[DPG21920]

I mean seriously, when a Derozan walks next year that opens up cap space. But WTF is this outdated, small market team going to do with the cap space? Some of y’all act like that cap space will be used on some next level type players. Remind me how often/likely that is going to occur.

Get some draft picks for Derozan. We draft and develop, it’s what we do best and about the only thing we do well.

I am not ignoring what Chinook is saying either; just providing some things I have heard + applying a different logic. But if the only deal SA can get is basically a salary dump, then it’s not worth it since you can get that with DeRozan walking anyways + have a better team this year.

But to Chinooks point and this point about “what good is cap space”, if you’re goal is to get picks for DeRozan to a trade a better way to do that might be letting DeRozan just walk and having cap space.

If no one is willing to give you good picks for DeRozan, we’ve seen cap space be used for some pretty damn good picks. So if SA wants picks and FA aren’t coming here, that opens up the cap space to be used to take on bad deals for draft picks.

[DAF86]

I think Murray can improve from 8ppg, and White can improve also. they are both very good defensively already. We already lost Davis for nothing, I dont want to lose derozan for nothing either...whats the use of having cap space if we cant sign a tier 1 or 2 free agent...

You wouldn't be trading for cap space, you would be trading for future assets like young players and draft picks. And maybe even a role that fits the team better like an Otto Porter.

[FkLA]

And yet, with all those improvements, he still failed to trully be a positive impact player, like all-star level players are suppossed to be.

What advanced stats are you basing that on?

He's a second/third tier "star". I don't think we'd be so much happier with other guys in the same tier or lower (Tobias, Beal, Porter Jr). They'd still be huge disappointments compared to what we lost (Neph).

[weebo]

I mean seriously, when a Derozan walks next year that opens up cap space. But WTF is this outdated, small market team going to do with the cap space? Some of y’all act like that cap space will be used on some next level type players. Remind me how often/likely that is going to occur.

Get some draft picks for Derozan. We draft and develop, it’s what we do best and about the only thing we do well.

Spurs are in win-mode now. What makes less sense is trading one of your cornerstone players (as bad as he is sometimes) for draft picks of rather "potential"...If the Spurs didn't "tank" last year and traded half the team they aren't doing it this year.

[Chinook]

I dont think these are equal at all. Sure letting a guy walk is fine; it’s just not optimal. If you know a guy is walking anyways, and you aren’t doing something like ruining a contending team, letting that player walk for nothing is sub-optimal. There is a scale; someone like Anderson/TP has only x amount of value. Letting them walk is lower opportunity cost. DeRozan’s opportunity cost is much higher.

It's the same. Letting a guy walk is not about losing or holding onto value. It's about getting what you want out of a player. I know we've gone all weird recently, but normally when you sign a guy to a contract for X number of years and Y dollars, you expect to get Y amount of value in terms of play for X years. Full stop. You don't sign that guy with the understanding that you will trade him. It really doesn't make sense. If DeRozan were like five years younger and making noise about not re-signing? Maybe. But now he's an older player who's still good but isn't irreplaceable. He's pretty much worth exactly what he's paid. You keep that guy and either let him walk or work on a new deal. It's not substantially different than how they've treated Gay.

Bad teams do sub optimal things. Clippers are a good team, they had a similar situation to DeRozan with Harris and look at them now. It can work both ways.

It doesn't make sense to use LA teams as examples. They don't have the same rule-sets. LAL was a terribly run team, and now they have James and Davis. OKC is now without any of their All-NBA players simply because George didn't want to be there anymore. Toronto lost their best player despite winning a le. That's the reality the Spurs live in, not the one the Clippers did. Plus, no one even has that kind of package to offer for DeRozan right now. Maybe they will near to the deadline.

Spurs needed DeRozan because Murray got injured. Had Murray not gotten injured I am not sure DeRozan was needed; just as the year before.

God no. I really hate advanced stats because of how much they've influenced the basic understanding of the game.. Murray did not carry the team in 2017-2018. He was one of the good defenders, but other players on the team went on to have strong years without him. He without Green and Anderson wasn't going to make up for not having the team's top scorer or assister. There's a reason why teams with high-impact role-players like Covington as their best players don't make any noise while teams with "chuckers" like DeRozan and Aldridge make it to the post-season year in and out. The team needed DeRozan to make it last year. They simply didn't have the talent without him.

Sure, it’s different players then and teams then, but I dont find it a stretch at all with emergence of White, getting Dejounte back, having Poeltl now and then adding Carroll/Lonnie that it would not be just as good of a chance to make 7th/8th seed as past two seasons.

I do. People overlook how inconsistent White and Murray were because they had someone like Prime Aldridge or DeRozan to mask it. You can't just take the best games from the young players and assume they'll do it most of the time. Maybe they do, but they have to prove it first, and neither did that.

There are plenty of good arguments for trading DeRozan and in fact it’s what I think WILL happen.

I still haven't heard a good argument for trading DeRozan now. Of course, if you think the Spurs will be a solid seventh seed again yet somehow in no danger of missing the playoffs, then they might have a reason to dump him. But that seems a unlikely outside situations where only eight teams are in the playoff race by February.

[RVSTX]

i prefer trading derozan, for the best deal available. thats what we did with the toronto trade...and we got jakob and keldon...

You wouldn't be trading for cap space, you would be trading for future assets like young players and draft picks. And maybe even a role that fits the team better like an Otto Porter.

[Chinook]

really not buying those comparisons. anderson was making peanuts on a rookie deal. what value were we going to get in a trade where the salaries matchup up? unless another team was just so high on anderson that they were willing to throw picks for him, a trade was never going to work out. its why trading forbes doesnt make much sense now. you're not going to get equal player value at a 3 mil salary (unless another team wants him a part of a bigger package, but again, that's a very different calculus than we'd be considering with demar)

and parker was one of the worst players in the league while being grossly overpaid. demar isn't what the spurs need, and is a poor fit, but he's significantly more attractive than TP was in his last year here

DeRozan isn't a bad fit for the Spurs, since only he and Aldridge are of consequence. How he fits with Murray is irrelevant until Murray actually becomes a star. Anyways, you do see teams dump guys on rookie deals for seconds all the time. Look at Stan Johnson, Thon Maker and Kelly Oubre as examples. Anderson was having a great year and could have fetched a second or two, but PATFO wanted to use his on-court value and then have the option of reevaluating during the off-season. That's the same reason they didn't trade away Gay. That they ended up re-signing him doesn't rebut the point. They didn't agree to a long-term deal with Gay in 2018 when they probably could have because they wanted to leave options open.

Guys expire every year. It's not some great horror. If DeRozan straight up doesn't want to be in SA another second, it's fine to move him. If you just aren't sure about extending him, you don't do anything.

[DPG21920]

Chinook, this isn’t some case of advanced stats and trying to apply it; SA literally made the playoffs with out Kawhi or DeRozan.

It’s not some guess that a LMA + role player team could make the playoffs - they did it. And the role players are better now even with their inconsistencies

[Roscoe P. Coltrane]

Most of them. Are you forgetting that a Kyle Anderson led perimeter won the same amount of games, the prior season, than the DeRozan led one last season?

Are you saying that Anderson is better than DeRozan? That team also still had Ginobili and Parker on it. I'm not a DeRozan fan and replacing him with someone like Covington ain't going to make the Spurs better but adding him to play along with DeRozan and Aldridge would make a huge difference.

And if Westbrook and PG are so much better than DeRozan why did the Thunder only finish one game better? And Adams is better than anything the Spurs had outside of Aldridge.

[DPG21920]

DeRozan isn't a bad fit for the Spurs, since only he and Aldridge are of consequence. How he fits with Murray is irrelevant until Murray actually becomes a star. Anyways, you do see teams dump guys on rookie deals for seconds all the time. Look at Stan Johnson, Thon Maker and Kelly Oubre as examples. Anderson was having a great year and could have fetched a second or two, but PATFO wanted to use his on-court value and then have the option of reevaluating during the off-season. That's the same reason they didn't trade away Gay. That they ended up re-signing him doesn't rebut the point. They didn't agree to a long-term deal with Gay in 2018 when they probably could have because they wanted to leave options open.

Guys expire every year. It's not some great horror. If DeRozan straight up doesn't want to be in SA another second, it's fine to move him. If you just aren't sure about extending him, you don't do anything.

It’s not about moving him just to move him. If you believe you can make the playoffs without him AND that even with him you aren’t a contender, getting something for him will be explored.

If it’s just a salary dump then no, keep him. But if you can get a player back that cracks the top 7-8 + a younger player that fits better to the other younger guys and/or extra picks it then becomes worth it.

But you don’t believe SA would make the playoffs sans DeRozan and that appears to shape your perspective vs mine.

[Chinook]

Problem with this is as the year goes on, DeRozan’s value goes down in most scenarios.

That doesn't matter. I don't know how many ways I have to say it. The point of having DeRozan is to use him, not to trade him. He's on the team to play. That's where his value lies. If has less trade value in seven months it's likely because he won't be able to offer as much on-court value to his next team. The Spurs didn't lose that value, though. Instead, they would have just used the value themselves to help win games.

It's like thinking you should sell your car ASAP because you'll get less for it if you wait a year or two. But if you drive that car for the year or two, then you got your money out of it.

[Mugen]

But what if the car can't shoot 3s or play defense

[Dennis the Menace]

I would rather finish 8th to 10th place in the West with good draft picks in the 1-2 year pipeline, instead of finishing 6th to 8th in the West and 1st or 2nd round exit with Derozan walking for nothing at the end of it & we don’t capitalize on the cap space in the transition.

Whatever decision & plan needs to be made to get solid investment players (all star, fringe all-star) or draft picks, let’s do it.

[DAF86]

Chinook, this isn’t some case of advanced stats and trying to apply it; SA literally made the playoffs with out Kawhi or DeRozan.

It’s not some guess that a LMA + role player team could make the playoffs - they did it. And the role players are better now even with their inconsistencies

A Murray, Forbes, White, Porter jr, Aldridge lineup, for example, would easily make the playoffs.

[Chinook]

Chinook, this isn’t some case of advanced stats and trying to apply it; SA literally made the playoffs with out Kawhi or DeRozan.

It's disingenous as . They made the playoffs without Aldridge too if you go back to when he wasn't on the team. May as well trade him too. It's just not a good argument. Green and Anderson are high-impact guys, and LMA had the year of his life. I'm not even getting into Ginobili being there to stabilize the bench or Gasol actually stilling being a good player. It simply doesn't make sense to believe this season without DeRozan would be anything like that year.

[DPG21920]

That doesn't matter. I don't know how many ways I have to say it. The point of having DeRozan is to use him, not to trade him. He's on the team to play. That's where his value lies. If has less trade value in seven months it's likely because he won't be able to offer as much on-court value to his next team. The Spurs didn't lose that value, though. Instead, they would have just used the value themselves to help win games.

It's like thinking you should sell your car ASAP because you'll get less for it if you wait a year or two. But if you drive that car for the year or two, then you got your money out of it.

Very different; I don’t agree with your analogy but that’s fine. I am fine keeping him if there is nothing good trade wise. I don’t want to just dump him. There is no point in that.

SA didn’t trade for DeRozan because they wanted to or because he was their main target; they did so because they had to and he was the best available after waiting trying to convince Kawhi to stay.

So it’s not like some FA they hand picked where the logic of what you say makes more sense. They didn’t go into this with a “I am only trading for him to re-trade him” but they are now exploring this because he is an asset and one that if they don’t cash in, the will get nothing.

They saw that with or without DeRozan the team won the same amount of games. They saw it was a sub optimal fit with over a full season to plan. This team was built for someone that is not DeRozan and they have done nothing to change that; I don’t think that is because they believe in DeRozan from what I have heard....hence the not even offering an extension.