Gotcha. A second rounder and a scrap heap reclamation. I’m more worried about trading 4 players for 0 after you cut Russ.
I'd still rather be at 5 than 7..even if talent is equal you can prioritize fit..
Gotcha. A second rounder and a scrap heap reclamation. I’m more worried about trading 4 players for 0 after you cut Russ.
I didn't realize you were shipping out Doug McDermott and Josh Richardson, too, all of them for a single pick. That's amazing.
The other point -- you should think of this in terms of opportunity cost. Jones and Collins aren't world-beaters, but they are good, developing players. What will it cost you to replace them with similar players? More than you think. You have to think of movements and trades not like you're in a video game where the abstraction of picks is all that matters. It's like trading Poeltl, if on a smaller scale. If you trade Poeltl, how do you replace Poeltl? What does that cost you?
Now that we are a bottom 3 team, I really don't like the flattened lottery odds
Loved 'em when we were always picking 29 or 30.
The trade literally cannot happen without either (1) the Spurs participating, (2) the Nets being okay keeping Westbrook (may piss off KD in process to strip assets away) or (3) parlaying Westbrook to a third team for a more useful, albeit bad contract that extends beyond this year.
One first while giving up several useful pieces, plus renting out the only cap space in the league, isn’t adequate compensation. The Spurs have $27 million in space, and only one other team has more than a million (Indiana at $9 million).
Screw the Lakers. I would much rather trade Poeltl, McD, Tre, Richardson in one or more separate trades. Their combined value plus the cap space available is worth more than one first. Like they showed last trade deadline, the Spurs can string together multiple deals.
If the Lakers want the Spurs’ help, there has to be pick swaps in addition to one unprotected first. Otherwise, they’re stuck with Westbrook.
And if people are worried about losing Poeltl and Richardson for nothing in FA, Poeltl for one will almost certainly command a premium deal and need the Spurs to facilitate a sign and trade.
It’s a better system, even though it might bite us in the ass. It was designed so that no other team would ever go through The Process for five years, and they won’t. There’s no incentive to, at 14%. It was terrible for their fans, and a black eye for the league.
Disagree and I bet from a trade value teams disagree. Getting who you want FOR sure vs having to hope for a player to fall 2 spots is big IMO
It will in trades. Hypothetical: let’s say SA gets pick 5 and DET gets pick 2. They already have Cade and maybe they listen to Keldon + pick 5 + future first for Scoot? Would they do that for pick 7 instead?
Maybe small chances, but in a rebuild like this it all matters. Every bit of value.
Don’t need to worry about fringe rotational guys in a rebuild as much. Spurs would have tons of cap space and can use what they were paying Doug (15M) to replace Tre and still be net even on money for example
Don’t understand your first point. This is a hypothetical where Spurs are in and making it work for the other teams.
To your other point: I get what you are saying and it’s valid. I personally think quality over quan y matters and I would rather have 1 unprotected first while taking on zero money next year than say breaking it up into 3 separate deals and getting 3 lottery protected firsts for example.
I’m not talking specific players, just level of talent. The Spurs don’t lock in on a player, anyway. They just pick from their board of 60 players whoever is the highest eval left.
The draft has been judged by analysts, multiple, to be pretty flat from 3-14 or 15. That’s either good, you’re getting high lottery value at 14 or 15, or bad, you’re getting late lottery talent starting at 3.
Kanye Irving…
Our cap could really grease the wheels in this drama
But talent for SA isn’t only consideration. Trade value, etc..all matters even if its material. It’s why you don’t see a ton of trading back that close. It happens, but not that often
You like my trade proposal?
Time to dust off those ole 3 way trade proposals from earlier this year...
Hardaway Jr, Bert, FRP for Kyrie? Even if Kyrie is a disaster, the Mavericks would get off those two bad contracts for only a FRP. More of a move for the Nets to rebuild and trade KD. I don’t see KD wanting to stay beyond this season and will force his way out.
I had forgotten that Indy helped us two ways: by taking a quality center off the market, and using their cap room,our only compe ion in that department, to do so.
I’d rather not help the Lakers that way tbh.
All your eggs in one basket for a 2027 pick that could theoretically be in the 20s? Say Lebron leaves in 2025, and they have a clean slate. They could easily retool in FA (it’s LA after all) and you’re picking outside the lottery. They have zero incentive to tank.
On the first point, how many paths are there to a Kyrie-to-Lakers deal that do not involve the Spurs? The Spurs’ cap room is the most valuable commodities in the deadline as it’s scarce. The Nets don’t want Westbrook back, as it kills any chances this year. So if they want a team to dump him on, there are very few that work. And the Spurs, meanwhile, can bid up the value for their space.
When only one team (well: two with Indiana) has space, it’s extremely valuable at the deadline or right before free agency. You can bet PATFO want more than one first out of this trade season. It may not happen , but they’re aiming higher.
The only thing working against space is that teams can aggregate trades together - waiting to put them into league office - and make the 125% of outgoing value into much bigger numbers.
I kinda feel that way too... I'm not saying I wouldn't do a deal with them but, I'd want the farm to help them...not just 1 pick
You think the lakers are going to win it all due to Josh? I would say robbing the lakers of a top 3 pick when LeBron is long gone potentially is helping sA.
All your eggs? It’s a guaranteed first and we lose who that is hard to replace or meaningful for wins?
The path for Kyrie to LA with no Spurs is easy. Literally Russ for Kyrie.
Yeah, I figure you'll have Giannis or Doncic on the Lakers by the second half of the decade, along those lines. Those FRPs aren't that appealing.
Indiana gave their space to Myles Turner for his extension. We’re the only game in town for big cap space.
Richardson & McDermott for Westbrook + an unprotected pick seems ok. But why add Tre & Zach? I'd say chances are not high that you can get a better player than Tre even with a better 2nd rounder than what was used for him (#41 I believe). I'd expect him to command ideally a couple good 2nds, at the very least one. As for Zach, he's on a cheap contract with low guaranteed money, he's a useful guy for some team. You don't need to put together a winning team for the young core to develop, but you can't rid yourself of every single guy with some experience, and they're not costing us lottery odds, so why get rid of them? It's a total tear down, I'm not totally opposed on paper if the price is too good, but I'm not sold this is the case here.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)