It would help to have better players around him for sure but if he is a superstar he should be able to have a go-to move to allow him to take over some games.
I agree and mentioned it in another post.
I think he's being too greedy and needs to simplify his game in the paint rather than taking 5sec all the time hopping to get a cutter or open guy to pass to.
But in terms of energy expenditure, a better passing game (plan) would save him a lot for the defensive end rather than him going 1vs1 so often.
Sorry for a late reply.
I partially agree. Of course you have to actually land the 14% odds - I'm not saying he was handed to the Spurs (unless you believe the theories). But I disagree that the "skill" (not what I'd call it but w/e) didn't give them any greater advantage -- the Spurs absolutely came "firing out of the gates" in terms of being prepared to get the best possible odds to land Wemby.
If putting yourself in the best possible position to get lucky isn't a skill, then what is, tbh? I'd argue it's almost all that matters in this world. There's no "right time" without a "right place", is there?
At the end of the day, my comment was a response to the years-long charade SpursTalk basement dwellers have gone on; from first criticizing the Spurs for choosing not to tank, to then complaining they weren't "picking a direction", to then complaining about the direction taken, only for the Spurs to absolutely nail their "Process" and grab the generational player. And still, to this day, there's hardly any recognition here for their work.
And as one of the few posters in this board who doesn't hate or B&M about every single move the Spurs make.... I like to remind people of this every now and then. For a forum that has complained so much and so incessantly about their front office, the Spurs are in a damn good position, and that's not luck, that's talent. I'm talking beyond Wemby here.
Thank you for this analysis, this is exactly what I was going for. "Talent" is not just landing Wemby with the 14% odds, it's putting together cohesive groups of players that grow and play good basketball every year. The Spurs, through all their limitations of being a small market, spurn by their previous superstar, etc, do a much better job than most other teams do, and it tends to show if you're actually paying attention.
Sure, we still need the "turn into a contender" phase to kick, but what team doesn't? Patience is a virtue, and the Spurs look to be heading in a very good direction thus far.
Looks like we have a better chance at seeing VW in The AS game with the new format!
"Talking beyond Wemby" ... if not for lucking into him, this team would be absolutely terrible, and choosing Amen over Scoot or Brandon Miller or not or whatever would not really move the needle much for now or the next couple of years.
I will never quite understand why some people seem to have an almost religious fervor when it comes to either hating on or glorifying PATFO.
People with religious fervor tendencies seem to have it for many things in an all or nothing manner.
Wow, your best analysis of my post really was the ol' "if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle"?
Why do you assume the team would be as constructed if the Spurs hadn't gotten Wemby? Why wouldn't the Spurs have re-tooled the roster to fit Amen or Miller or whoever? Why couldn't the Spurs use their wealthy chest of picks to acquire better or different talent in that scenario? You don't know at all...
If you actually cared to read my post, you'd see it's nowhere near "religious fervor" or whatever. Or is the Overton Window on ST so re ed right now that anything left of " PATFO" is seen as glorifying them, tbh?
This is actually a fun experiment.Wow, your best analysis of my post really was the ol' "if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle"?
Why do you assume the team would be as constructed if the Spurs hadn't gotten Wemby? Why wouldn't the Spurs have re-tooled the roster to fit Amen or Miller or whoever? Why couldn't the Spurs use their wealthy chest of picks to acquire better or different talent in that scenario? You don't know at all...
If you actually cared to read my post, you'd see it's nowhere near "religious fervor" or whatever. Or is the Overton Window on ST so re ed right now that anything left of " PATFO" is seen as glorifying them, tbh?
From what I've read, the Spurs would have taken Miller #2 (I forgot who reported this the other day... might have been Tynan) and that they had Amen over Scoot. This are all great signs for the talent evaluation department that we had started to be concerned about.
So let's say the Spurs got Miller. Let's also assume they still draft Castle, since the Spurs certainly would have still been in position to draft him and all indications are that they had their eyes on him for a long time.
What move do you think the Spurs would have reasonably made differently? I think the only different moves would have been not signing CP3, and probably not trading for Barnes (though maybe, since it still would have netted us assets, though we'd probably be looking to flip Barnes). We probably would have used pick 8... and without Wemby maybe they go for Zach Edey. So I'd feel pretty confident that the lineup today would be something like Castle/Dev/Miller/Sochan/Collins. Maybe Tre in at PG and either Castle or Dev to the bench (probably Castle) and maybe Edey in for Collins. IMO, that team is significantly worse than the team we have right now (though maybe it could be good in the long run, though of course I'd still rather have Wemby).
The team has not shown a willingness to go out and make a big splashy move, and certainly I don't think they would if we had Miller (or Amen) instead of Wemby. If anything, I think Wemby makes us MORE likely to make an uncharacteristic big move.
So, I think it's pretty reasonable (though maybe still wrong) to say that if we didn't land Wemby, we'd still be pretty bad and probably looking towards the 2025 draft as the opportunity to get our Superstar to pair next to our other young guns in Dev/Sochan/Miller/Castle/Edey. If we have a long term view... that actually wouldn't be that bad of a place to be. Flagg, Harper or Egor added to those 5 might be pretty fun (and I think they all generally fit... if anything, Devin probably is the one who fits the least just from a timeline POV).
They for sure make that Barnes trade, even if they had no intention of him ever playing. It was a no brainer. They gave up absolutely nothing for him and an unprotected first round swap from the most futile franchise in the league. The fact that he has been a fantastic add both on and off the court is gravy. They could still flip him. But that trade was getting made Wemby or no Wemby, CP3 or no CP3.
The "religious fervor" thing was not directed at you at all. But I started my post quoting you, so fair enough if you read it that way. You don't come across as a poster with anything approaching religious fervor one way or the other to me.Wow, your best analysis of my post really was the ol' "if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle"?
Why do you assume the team would be as constructed if the Spurs hadn't gotten Wemby? Why wouldn't the Spurs have re-tooled the roster to fit Amen or Miller or whoever? Why couldn't the Spurs use their wealthy chest of picks to acquire better or different talent in that scenario? You don't know at all...
If you actually cared to read my post, you'd see it's nowhere near "religious fervor" or whatever. Or is the Overton Window on ST so re ed right now that anything left of " PATFO" is seen as glorifying them, tbh?
Your post read a little like we should give PATFO more credit for actually scouting a hyped-up player and recognizing Wemby is a generational talent, which I frankly find absurd. Even the most incompetent FO in the league would have taken Wemby with the first pick, just for the hype alone.
Sure, if the Spurs had taken Amen or Miller or whomever, they might have made some other desicions as well. But do you really think the team would be close to play-in contention right now after years in the lottery if they had not gotten Wemby? My fear is that the game has passed PATFO by a little in recent years. I feel they might not quite be willing to acknowledge the big importance of shooting in today's NBA, for example. The largely same group of people who made great decisions 10 to 20 years ago might not be on top of the game as much anymore these days.
VOTE FOR WEMBY
Back to the original SL: CP3, DV-24, Barnes, Sohound, and V-DUB1. LET'S GOOO!!!
24 field goal attempts last night was good. He’s got to get that many shots every night. Right now, he’s under 20 FGAs per game.
Updated MVP ladder, 8th place for Wemby.
https://www.nba.com/news/kia-mvp-lad...0-2024-edition
No way he gets into top5, but if he continues playing like this, he'll surely finish in 6th-8th range.
Hopefully he's 2nd team all-NBA this season.
Last edited by LeBowen; 12-20-2024 at 11:23 AM.
2nd team All-NBA is definitely on the table, and if he keeps playing like this he should be at least 3rd.
No way? Still early in the season to be making definitive declarations about his ceiling.
Ceiling for the season.
SGA/Luka/Tatum/Giannis/Jokic is a lock for 1st team and they're top5 on MVP ladder.
Wemby won't be able to get into top5 MVP placement even if he averages 30ppg from now on simply because Spurs won't win even 45 games, probably not even 40.
I think 3rd is a lock.
They removed positions for all-NBA, will be interesting to see if he gets 2nd team.
All-NBA and DPOY will be a great second season.
if the spurs play well and get 7-8 game winning streak and end up with 45 wins with wemby leading the way , all nba 2nd team is a lock and might have a chance at all nba first team.
Some interesting things to pick up from Wemby's splits:
First, none of this is surprising, but the Spurs are incredibly dependent on how Wemby's shooting the 3 ball. In wins, Wemby is shooint .407 from the 3 point line, and in losses he's shooting .244. How well Wemby shoots from 3 is pretty much dictating whether the Spurs win or lose. His defensive rating is about the same in wins or losses, but his offensive rating goes from 123 in wins to 92 in losses. This is a gigantic swing! He has taken way more 3s in wins, and way fewer in losses (123 to 78).
Its 12 wins to 10 losses so the games are close but the shooting differences are stark. On one hand, the 3 point shot has more variance in general, but it also shows how much Wemby is reliant on it to have good games (which anyone watching should know). Still, I wasn't prepared for how different the splits would be. Watching last night I was struck that the 3 is his go to in so many situations and I'm torn on it. On one hand, having two points shots that are more reliable is something that is really important, but on another he hit some clutch 3s last night that were vital to the win and if he doesn't take them then he can't hit them.
This is a good observation, and I think the good news is that:
- Wemby's 3P variance is decreasing (0.026 over the full season, down to 0.019 over the last 10 games)
- slightly less reliance on the 3 (last night was his first game with over 10 attempts since 11/26 @ UTA, which at the time capped off a stretch of 5 straight games with more than 12 3PA)
- anecdotally it seems like they're figuring out ways to get Wemby involved in the paint more as of late
With all that said... over Wemby's last 10 games (Spurs are 6-4), he's still shooting .409 in Ws and .211 in losses... so it appears that the relationship is still holding true, it's just less frequently pointing to L triggers. One other note, in those 6 wins he is averaging 11 3PA whereas in the 4 losses he is only at 9.5 3PA. Not a huge difference over a small sample, but hopefully it indicates that Wemby recognizes that when he isn't hitting, it hurts the team, and is curtailing the attempts.
Great stuff.
We need Wemby’s signiture shoe
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote