It wouldn’t shock me if the Lakers made the playoffs. NO has the option to take either the LA 2024 OR 2025 pick, and I don’t think the Milwaukee picks will amount to any star quality guys. Giannis ain’t as old as LeBron.
The Spurs should be using the seconds they're getting to trade for talent, not to draft people. In that vein, getting four picks in tge future is just better than getting two. And were those seconds even LAL's natural picks? I can imagine they've traded those away years ago.
Just saying that its at least debatable that LA picks are better or equal to NO, but one situation has us able to use 14M on a player Spurs actually like and still have 50M in space vs the other having one that we hope turns into a + value.
If the downside is missing out on 2 2nds but the upside is signing a player with more potential/better long term fit? Yes, it’s a small detail, but one I would prefer. But it’s all good. Nothing to truly be upset about.
But once LA deal was passed on, I get it. Can’t rewind time so have to deal with what is vs what maybe “could have been”.
Last edited by DPG21920; 02-10-2023 at 03:45 PM.
Why trade for a player using the picks, when you can just use the 14M allocated to Graham to sign a player you like better with more upside/fit and have the 2 picks from LA (or wherever they come from)?
Then in that case you still have 2 picks to trade (I agree with you there, 2RP for trading vs just all actual drafting) and hopefully a player that is more valuable than 2 2nds left over. But again, thats minutiae
At the end of the day, it just seems like this boils down to you not liking Doug, which is fine. However, at that point we are arguing over flavors of ice cream. It’s not like NBA2K were every player has a numerical rating and we just picked the best one. The Spurs clearly wanted Doug on the team. We may all think that is a terrible decision, but it doesn’t really matter. Signing Doug didn’t stop them from signing someone else, because they didn’t want to sign someone else. They signed the guy they wanted. Whether they are paying him the minimum, or if they would have been paying him $25MM/yr, it actually wouldn’t have mattered.
And as to the dumps we missed out on… we didn’t really miss out on them. Wiseman ended up not being a dump. The Warriors got positive value for him. The Lakers somehow managed to get positive value out of Westbrook. None of the other ones happened and we don’t know if they were even really on the table.
We can speculate as to what we missed out on, but we actually don’t know until someone comes out and definitively says “the Spurs had an opportunity to take Player X and get Asset Y and Z”, We haven’t even heard rumors of anything they missed out on, other than a hypothetical early Westbrook deal (which, let’s say it’s real… then we are arguing if Graham and two extra SRPs is worth $15MM. That’s debatable and everyone will have their own opinion. You prefer the Lakers deal, others will prefer the Pelicans deal, and that’s okay).
The social media buzz around DJ being traded wasn’t some random dip on twitter putting a hypothetical post. It was legit NBA media saying there was smoke, and there were multiple teams rumored in the mix. If you’re an NBA GM who would have an interest in DJ, and you saw that and DIDN’T pick up the phone, that’s your own damn fault.That's not how trades work
NBA teams don't see a tweet and then tell their GM to get on the phone
That's like me saying Lebron is available and 28 teams start calling the lakers
Agree lol. I’ve explicitly said I understand that Spurs got what they wanted and it’s just me disagreeing with their logic, mindset and values. My only point is it was a clear overpay for no good reason and that it turned Doug into a negative asset for no reason when during rebuilds you should only be signing guys who you have an eye on flipping and/or clearly fit with rebuild/young core + potential. Thats it.
The Indy deal, as Hollinger pointed out, was a clear miss. We know LA offered Russ for Josh/Doug and 2 2nds earlier in year. So there was clear missed opportunities even if they are small. Which again, I know is not a big deal. Doesn’t mean it cannot be discussed or argued.
I meant contractually speaking - Tre is a re-signing decision this summer
Wonder if the Graham acquisition is in some small part a front office squeamishing on the prospects of Scoot in a Spur jersey as well though with Tre possibly signing elsewhere this summer it doesn't have to be more complicated than simply shoring up against Tre's possible departure
The high 2nds I actually like, every year there's a couple of interesting prospects that slip, and we're projected to have very good ones for at least the next 2 drafts. But yeah, as a general rule you can't use them all, either use them to land players (like the Clippers did with Bones Hyland), or to trade up, or maybe take a flyer on a draft & stash prospect (like Procida last year). There are only so many players you can develop at once.
I missed the Indy deal, which one was that? I actually see the value in the SRPs and I want as many free ones as I can get. As this deadline just proved, they are super helpful when we are actually a contender and need that vet role player (even if a half-season rental) for the playoff push. The ability to get a Josh Richardson or GPII (who GS clearly finds useful) for some SRPs is awesome to me, I want a stockpile just for that purpose.
Tre Jones has basically been put on watch. Can’t have two backup level PGs making 12mm/year.
I have very little doubt the Spurs would pass on Scoot. Almost no doubt whatsoever.
You think they go for culture over talent? My biggest worry about us finally committing to a rebuild.
If we land #2, certainly we can’t straight pass on Scoot, but we could look to trade out. What are some options for trading out if we really wanted to, and assuming other teams really have him graded as another generational talent.
I’d want to get someone like Ivey and whatever (not #1) pick DET has, or Mathurin plus Indy’s pick IF it were no lower than 6 (they’d have a long way to far from where they are now). Neither or those teams need to do that deal though, as they’re backcourts are in good shape. Any other high value prospects among other teams picking in the Top 6 we could do that kind of a deal with?
1. Scoot is probably overrated by a good amount. I don't get how people are spooging themselves over him. Very good? Yes. Generational talent? Best in ten years? Ehh...
2. He's AAU-god stuck on himself, very high opinion, "best player of all time" sort of .
3. Undersize combo-guard who is very, very high usage.
If the team lands the #2 spot, teams might offer treasure chests for him.
Was the Bucks-Nets trade where Indy netted 3 2nds for helping…I agree big picture about stockpiling assets. I want that as much as anyone and always push for that. It’s what shapes basically my entire view about not signing “bad deals” and always looking for ways to get more assets.
I agree SPurs got assets here too - I just dont like what they left on table and thought they maybe could have done better on Josh deal (either by taking LA deal earlier or letting Josh walk & signing someone to Grahams 14M this off season that would net better than those seconds IMO while still maintaining 50M in cap space etc.
So it’s not “bad” in the context of just being legit bad; it’s bad in terms of some opportunity costs and what ifs. But ultimately they did their job and moved on from vets and got picks. So thats good in my book.
I mean, landing at #2 is as highly unlikely as landing at #1. But I can see a team like the Wizards or Charlotte really wanting him, so trade down and ask how many future picks they each want to give up. I see Scoot as maybe like a Bradley Beale type, a guy who will score a ton, get assists at times, get talked about a lot, never win that many games.
I think it would be very, very hard for SA to pass on Scoot at 2 - lots of time left to see/watch prospects but as of now? Scoot is on paper a great fit.
I would hate to trade down just for future picks, much preferred to get a legit young prospect to go with their pick to accelerate the rebuild. Unfortunately neither of those teams have jack to offer. I guess the good news is that neither of those teams appear an immediate threat to be a playoff contender (though you never know). I wouldn’t go from 2 to 7 just for one future FRP though. I’d need #7 from WAS (assuming that is where they landed) plus their 2024, 2026, 2028. If we land #2 it is definitely in our interest for the Scoot hype to hit high levels.
It's all wishing and hoping right now. To your point, it would be great to get Mathurin or maybe Ivey, but I think Indiana is way too smart for that, dunno about Detroit. In this optimal other world, I can dream of trading down some spots, still getting the player we value (because I think the Thompson twins go high for some reason), and pulling multiple future picks. If teams bite on the 'generational talent' thing, then they would bid up a few unprotected firsts.
But this is just dreaming conjecture.
If Spur dont view Scoot as much better than someone else I would be fine with that type of thing if they get an insane package…Spurs draft well so I trust them. But man, I hope SA lands top 2 lol.
It would change everything potentially. Lots of options but even if its Scoot I would be thrilled as of today. I really, really, really, dont want HOU to land top 2. That would suck so bad.
I feel like Spurs only pass on Scoot if there is a Leonard force out vibe. On the basketball court Scoot is the clear #2 selection as it stands currently.
with the state of our roster, looking at "fit" when it comes to draft picks is a mistake. if there's a talent gap, you take the better player, period. sure, if our roster/lineup was more filled out with "our guys" that we want going forward, yeah at that point you look to accommodate with fit.
im not looking at any draft prospect and thinking "hmm how is this guy going to mesh with tre jones and jeremy sochan" lol
i havent really taken a serious look at any of the big name prospects yet, probably will do so close to or after the lottery. but the consensus seems to be that its Wemby, gap, scoot, gap, and then some others. if thats the case, i'm taking scoot #2 and not thinking twice
The way people talk about Scoot’s ego, I wouldn’t put it outside of the realm of possibility for him to demand a trade before he signs an NBA contract if the Spurs pick him.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
