So to finish up the idea that was the topic of that dispute. This is an example of a completed roster after a Durant-Collins-Vassell trade:
Fox, Castle, Joseph (traded for Wesley since Blake is seemingly unhappy and probably wants a change of scenery)
Harper, Sam Merrill (using the LLE) Mills
Sochan, Johnson, Minix
Durant, O'Neale (traded for Branham as part of the Durant trade), Mamukelashvili
Wembanyama, Portis (MLE), Yang (Hassan, drafted trading up from 38 to 29 as part of the Durant trade)
TW: Ingram, Sears (ALA PG), Faye (Senegal C)
They bring back some old vets and chemistry guys, take some fliers and overall have a mix of a bunch of different kinds of players and skill-sets.
Good list. I think we can take the same approach and dig deeper on respective depth charts. For example... instead of Isaac and WCJ for Orlando... is Goga the guy who can be available? I think these are likely the kinds of opportunities our FO is digging into, as opposed to the star trades we are commonly linked to.
This offseason is going to be nuts!
It's possible that all 30 teams are involved in trades in one form or another. The Zion bombs adds to the bizarre nature of things.
Between the draft, free agency and trades opening up, I truly have now clue as to how things will look after the smoke clears.
Maybe I'm over-reacting, as most years less happens than expected, but, this feels different.
If we can shore up rebounding and shooting with decent to good defenders, I think we'll have a chance to smell the play-in. The West is a bloodbath.
All this to say, I think the Spurs excel at the micro trades and acquisitions. As many others have noted here, there are a bunch of under-the-radar players that might outplay their price tags.
I don’t know much about chinook but if English is his second language then he’s one gifted dude. 99th percentile
Any way the Spurs can get Tristan Vukcevic from Washington? He looks decent - legit size, has some skill, excellent shooter given his age, not horrible on the boards
This offseason is gonna be one wild ride.
Durant is like Barnes' final form
fkn valuable as fk. Be redacted to not try to get him for 2 years
Because it's good for Victor. Yes, I think if things go right, the team could win a le with this core. But that's not the point of bringing Durant in. Leveling up guys is the point. Giving them an experienced vet who's been in a bunch of situations is the point. Giving them a guy who can take over a game and show them how that works from a mental-preparation standpoint ... is the point. The point is to put the guys on the roster in the best position to compete when the time arises (in 1-3 years). I find giving the guys a superstar with more tread left on the tires than Paul but who still is old enough to not take over the team. A guy who show the young bloods the path to the mountain top.You've talked a lot about how this team isn't ready to compete... so why would we want to conform our team around a 37-year old on a SuperMax for the next 1-3 years?
Bad teams are full of high picks who get to be top options. The last thing Castle and Harper need is to get the Vassell or Johnson treatment where they focus on becoming stars and fail to develop skills beyond that. It's not a crime to be a third, fourth or fifth option when you're a new player. Even if everything goes great and Harper and Castle are the two co-stars with Wemby for a decade, one of them will be the third option. Whichever of the duo starts will be the third or fourth option, and they need to develop in that situation. A Castle who can't shoot or defend and who doesn't help on the boards is a failed prospect, and that has nothing to do with Durant. What KD can do, Harper and Castle will likely never come close to. If the Spurs are tanking for Boozer or whomever, they can cater to giving their young guards all the touches they can stand. If they want to win games, they can't let a guy who had Castle's impact and a rookie dictate their approach until/unless they show they're capable of contributing to winning.What I don't value as highly is what Durant brings (elite scoring), because I don't want our newly acquired star PG, reigning ROY or #2 draft pick relegated to 3rd, 4th and 5th options (which they will be... because Kevin isn't, nor should he, going to be supplanted as a scoring option by those guys).
You don't get to roll over cap space like in the NFL. The Spurs likely do have to make sure that in 2027-2028 and 2028-2029 that they're managing their salary correctly. But they're in no danger of crossing that line in 2025-2027. That's why it's important for them to spend on the other guys while they're able to. According to that spreadsheet RCD posted, they should have enough breathing room to have Durant, Fox and Wemby in the first year of Wemby's deal. It's that next year, when Castle has earned a max contract, that would matter. But for all we know, the Spurs might have traded away Castle during the previous draft by that point, and they'd get a whole extra year of salary space before Harper's deal. I'm all for the team being fiscally responsible, but part of that responsibility is knowing how to spend too, not just how to save.But if we do get KD, I hope it's only a 1-year deal and part of his value is viewed as an expiring that helps us manage the larger contracts to come, because I view the tax line as a hard cap for this franchise.
Again, avoiding getting into another semantics squabble. Our difference is two-fold. 1) We disagree about the nature of the team's offense. That's pretty well established at this point. 2) We disagree on what the team needs to do to fix their defensive issues. You seem to believe the team needs to bring in personnel to fix the issue. Hence you've posted trade ideas for Murphy, Washington, Gafford, etc. I think if the team were coached correctly, they'd be a top-seven defense with no major change to their roster. I think they'd be an elite defense with Durant AND have a chance to be an elite and robust offense. So when I watch the Spurs, I don't see a personnel issue; I see an issue that's existed before the current personnel was what it is today. So I don't think there's as much value in getting those defensive players as you do. If the coaching isn't there, those defensive guys will fall into the mire just like how even the decent shooters the Spurs draft somehow become bad shooters in SA nowadays. If the coaching is there, their floor would rise so much that it wouldn't make sense to look at those guys over a floor-raiser like Durant. Is there a middle ground? Yes. But it doesn't look like the trades folks are proposing to me. It's far more conservative.But sometimes I wonder if when you read other people's posts, if you are reading the same thing as me... because you seem to misinterpret them a lot (in this case, interpreting my having a problem with Durant's deficiencies on this team as some kind of lack of a desire for the rest of our team to improve on their deficiencies. Our guys can improve on those things without having to do so because we brought in KD)
Last edited by Chinook; 05-30-2025 at 10:47 PM.
Even if Durant doesn’t turn the spurs into immediate le contenders you can’t act like there’s no value in getting the team into the playoffs. Wemby hasn’t played a single important nba game to date. No “must win” games. Nothing resembling playoff atmosphere.
adding Durant will get the team some of that experience and he’s a complete gym rat type who will be yet another role model for the younger guys
We don't need to get KD to get into the playoffs.
We absolutely can, he’s a free agent. Nice target.
Weird. This was the exact same argument I made (and you scoffed at) at the beginning of last season. I wanted Wemby to get his Terry mings. But we've actually already made that acquisition, one who is younger and will be here longer. No need to build the team around a 37-year old SuperMax guy any longer, in my opinion. Has Fox been in the same situations as Durant? Admittedly, no. But Durant's championship credential is "I won some chips by joining the best team in the league"... I'm not sure how impactful that lesson is to anyone. Harrison Barnes can also impart the same wisdom. He (nor Fox) can teach Wemby how to be a league MVP... but most other league MVPs found their way without this specific brand of mentorship either.
There are already two other guys who will be the focus ahead of them. Keldon and Vassell didn't have that. My opinion is we don't need a third, especially one who is a bottom third percentile defender.Bad teams are full of high picks who get to be top options. The last thing Castle and Harper need is to get the Vassell or Johnson treatment where they focus on becoming stars and fail to develop skills beyond that. It's not a crime to be a third, fourth or fifth option when you're a new player. Even if everything goes great and Harper and Castle are the two co-stars with Wemby for a decade, one of them will be the third option. Whichever of the duo starts will be the third or fourth option, and they need to develop in that situation. A Castle who can't shoot or defend and who doesn't help on the boards is a failed prospect, and that has nothing to do with Durant. What KD can do, Harper and Castle will likely never come close to. If the Spurs are tanking for Boozer or whomever, they can cater to giving their young guards all the touches they can stand. If they want to win games, they can't let a guy who had Castle's impact and a rookie dictate their approach until/unless they show they're capable of contributing to winning.
And you're right... Castle's shooting, defending and rebounding have nothing to do with Durant. Bringing him in or not isn't going to change his trajectory in those areas. But it might stunt his growth as an offensive contributor, otherwise. I'm not interested in doing that. Not because I think Castle is better, or is going to be better, than Kevin Durant... but because Kevin Durant isn't going to be here in our prime winning years.
The spreadsheet RCD posted is based on KD taking a 2/60 extension, something baseline bum suggested and you already said was unrealistic. It's also based on Sochan extending for 3/33 on a declining deal. I hope this is what he extends for, but I'm not so sure. It's also an incomplete roster.You don't get to roll over cap space like in the NFL. The Spurs likely do have to make sure that in 2027-2028 and 2028-2029 that they're managing their salary correctly. But they're in no danger of crossing that line in 2025-2027. That's why it's important for them to spend on the other guys while they're able to. According to that spreadsheet RCD posted, they should have enough breathing room to have Durant, Fox and Wemby in the first year of Wemby's deal. It's that next year, when Castle has earned a max contract, that would matter. But for all we know, the Spurs might have traded away Castle during the previous draft by that point, and they'd get a whole extra year of salary space before Harper's deal. I'm all for the team being fiscally responsible, but part of that responsibility is knowing how to spend too, not just how to save.
Let's instead assume these things for a moment:
0) Keldon, Barnes and #14 go out to acquire KD
1) We use the MLE and sign someone for a flat 3-year deal for the full MLE
2) We use the BAE for a 1-year deal this year and then again in two years... in the meantime, we fill that roster spot with a 5-year vet on a min deal
3) Every empty roster spot is filled with a 5-year vet on a min deal
4) We add no other draft picks after #2 this year
5) Every contract that isn't noted as an extension below is backfilled with a 5-year vet on a min deal
6) KD extends on a 1+1 for exactly what he's making now
7) Instead of the 3/33 assumed for Sochan, he instead signs a flat 3/45
That gets us into the tax every single one of the next 4 years... which I don't think the Spurs will do. It's not about "rolling over cap space" (and no one ever suggested this, my friend). It's about treating the tax line like a hard cap. The Spurs aren't deep into the tax, but the assumptions here are fairly moderate. So to avoid the tax, one of the things above will have to give... which will it be? I've already given up adding any FRPs to our team, and if do add FRPs (which we should), those will all cost more than this scenario. KD might take less? Maybe we sign Sochan for less? Or maybe we just let Sochan walk? Maybe we don't use our MLE this way? Maybe we dump Keldon? Or maybe I'm forgetting about some kind of loophole here? Something will have to give though. This is why I said if we got Durant, I'd want it to be viewed as a 1-year expiring. In part, because I also don't really want a roster that is 6 players deep and filled out with nothing but minimum guys. That's a personal preference, but I don't think that's a smart way to go about constructing the roster.
The coaching issue and the Durant issue aren't related though. The coaching needs to improve. We're in agreement. It doesn't need Kevin Durant to improve, and we certainly shouldn't only improve it if we get Durant. Likewise, we shouldn't not improve it if we don't get Durant. But if the coaching improves, I still want my PF to be things that Kevin Durant is not and I am not necessary seeking another alpha scorer for the team. You seem to want one. That's fine. We disagree. We aren't going to convince one another.Again, avoiding getting into another semantics squabble. Our difference is two-fold. 1) We disagree about the nature of the team's offense. That's pretty well established at this point. 2) We disagree on what the team needs to do to fix their defensive issues. You seem to believe the team needs to bring in personnel to fix the issue. Hence you've posted trade ideas for Murphy, Washington, Gafford, etc. I think if the team were coached correctly, they'd be a top-seven defense with no major change to their roster. I think they'd be an elite defense with Durant AND have a chance to be an elite and robust offense. So when I watch the Spurs, I don't see a personnel issue; I see an issue that's existed before the current personnel was what it is today. So I don't think there's value in getting those defensive players. If the coaching isn't there, those defensive guys will fall into the mire just like how even the decent shooters the Spurs draft somehow become bad shooters in SA nowadays. If the coaching is there, their floor would rise so much that it wouldn't make sense to look at those guys over a floor-raiser like Durant. Is there a middle ground? Yes. But it doesn't look like the trades folks are proposing to me. It's far more conservative.
It's also been a long time since I've actually seen KD raise the floor anywhere... all his teams have been flatlining or getting worse since GSW, with coaches getting fired and teams being dismantled. I'm not saying that's all KD's fault... but he certainly doesn't have a recent track record of raising floors.
Last edited by scott; 05-30-2025 at 11:07 PM.
I'm not actually obsessed with the idea of bringing in Durant. The thing is for me, if it's not him, the Spurs should just draft Sorber/Flemming at 14 and go into the season. Then around the deadline they can read the market and react. If the Suns don't make a Durant trade this summer (and there's a legit chance they won't), then he'll be pennies on the dollar. Or guys who don't look like they have any chance of shaking loose like. Mikal Bridges, JJJ or Doncic might be options. Or they can use their expirings and seconds to grab a role-player like Clarke. Ideas like Vassell or Johnson and 14 for some role-player don't appeal to me at all.
vassell + Sochan
to the Jazz for
Kyle Filipowski + Taylor Hendricks + the 21st pick
Barnes + Keldon Johnson + Pick 38
to Boston for
Neemias Queta + Pick 32
Sign Tristan Vicivic.
Draft
2. Dylan Harper
14. Carter Bryant
21. Rasheer Fleming
32. Drake Powell
Roster
PG- Fox, Harper, Wesley
SG- Castile, Champagnie, Powell
SF- Hendricks, Bryant, Minnix
PF- Filipowski, Flemming
C- Wemby, Queta, Vucivic
Likewise I'm not that against bringing him in. But I do think it would create more of a crunch around what I perceive as a hard cap than is being let on. Because I don't think Durant is going to extend for a discount (I could be wrong), nor do I even necessarily think he should. Durant for one year? Sure. I don't think that makes us a contender, but maybe we get a nice year of mentorship. Maybe Durant does extend for cheap (who knows). But I feel trading for Durant and extending him for what I think he would command would be a mistake.
Likewise, I actually want us to just pick someone at 14. Shake the trees around the low-key trades that Brian Wright likes to do (which I posted about in this very thread). Fill out the roster that way. IMO, that's still a playoff (not play-in) team. Try to do that with one of Vassell or Keldon and our zillion SRPs if you can. We already made a major trade AND got gifted a #2 draft pick. Keep going with this... it's working out rather well, actually.
And yes... actually coach the team please.
How about getting into round 2. Having consistently compe ive games night in night out against the better teams throughout the season. That is all immensely valuable experience. Okc didn’t become a finals team overnight
OKC also didn’t give up assets bringing in a 37 year old SuperMax guy.
including Branham and O'Neal doesn't work with this trade. You can't aggregate players and be over the 2nd apron.
Last edited by RC_Drunkford; 05-31-2025 at 05:02 AM.
What the Spurs really lack on the rebounding front and defensively is a "tone setter". In about 50% of the postgame interviews Mitch Johnson said "we lacked physicality". We need somebody out there who brings it from tip off. That's one of the main reasons I want John Collins, because Will Hardy said that he has been that guy for the Jazz.
Yes the coaching has been bad, but these young guys need to have somebody out there who just hustles and plays hard. I also agree that adding KD would have us fill out the end of the roster with a bunch of minimum guys and I don't think that's ideal. 3-and-D players are hard to come by and cost a lot in the NBA if you trade for them. There are a bunch of those in our draft range.
Fox is good enough for that. And having a guy out there who shows them how to bring the right physicality is as important to level up.
Again I'm not completely out on Durant, but there are other avenues that give you more upside, more young talent and good value contracts for the long term.
I can easily make the argument that this roster here is as good, even though yours has a trade in it that can't happen:
Fox/Harper/Wesley
Castle/Champagnie/Powell (2nd round)
Vassell/Sochan/Minnix
Collins/LaRavia/Nance Jr.
Wemby/Sorber/Vukcevic
with more upside and better contracts
You don't have to aggregate them in this deal. Branham can be traded for O'Neale straight up. But it's part of the deal in that the Spurs are paying for both Royce and KD with the same picks
That's definitely not "Just as good". This has "We have X at home" energy.
no you can't unless you trade O'Neal into the Spurs MLE which then means you can't sign Portis
Yes you can. Just about but you can trade them for each other after July 1st.
if you trade O'Neal into cap space, yes. But there is no cap space once you trade Vassell and Barnes for KD
There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 5 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
