Pop rehabilitating Westbrook is a fascinating dark comedy.
I’m pretty sure neither Russ nor the Spurs want a year of him on our rebuilding roster.
Pop rehabilitating Westbrook is a fascinating dark comedy.
Last edited by The Truth #6; 07-15-2022 at 08:11 AM.
Agree with what a few others have said here…only getting one first for Poetl/JRich/taking on Westbrook’s contract would be a disappointment in my eyes. Ideally those assets should yield us at least 2 firsts.
That being said I’m just glad it seems like we have a firm direction. Getting a deal or two like the ones talked about here would firmly put to rest any ideas that the FO isn’t committed to tanking.
The Spurs need to give the youngsters playing time, and I can’t see them getting into a John Wall type situation, so that points toward a buyout, I would guess.
The way it was explained to me is that the Spurs could already get lottery protected picks for Poeltl if they wanted to. However, the Spurs don't value lottery protected picks nearly as much as unprotected picks. So if adding salary absorption to Poeltl nets the Spurs draft capital that includes at least one unprotected pick, that'd be preferable.
Russ won’t want to be on a rebuilding team’s roster. We won’t want his volatile personality in the locker room, either. He’ll be bought out for a small amount and waived. When he signs, his new salary is also offset to us, so probably $6M ish for taxpayer MLE, or $11M ish for full MLE. He is untradeable at his current salary, other than as a salary dump. His salary counts on our cap whether we waive him or not,so there won’t be a scramble to hit minimum payroll. Waiving him also adds a roster slot to evaluate a young player.
I think the two points are separated.
IE spurs are willing to take Westbrook for a pick
Spurs is also ok to trade poeltl and Richardson for more picks even if as part of that package.
(Means they can have more than one pick)
For example
As spurs is also willing to facilitate Knicks Mitc thing. For Which is as of now not related to Westbrook
So it may or or may not be related. As long as more picks
It’s $47 million, but there is zero money after this season. The opportunity cost to taking on Westbrook, though, is you cannot facilitate other deals as the season goes on.
I’d rather pair Poeltl + smaller amount of space for an unprotected pick (heck, I want an unprotected for Poeltl without taking in salary ballast), and same with Richardson.
I think most likely scenario is Lakers can’t find a deal that works with Westbrook.
Any word if the Spurs are insisting on at least one unprotected swap too? It really sucks to think the Spurs would burn so much of their cap space and positive-value players on a single pick that could end up being outside the lottery anyway.
And the Spurs have such a good track record at turning late firsts into rotation players (or better), I would think they would prioritize, say, two or three lottery protected firsts over a single unprotected pick. Quality over quan y of picks makes sense in a league like the NBA, but the Spurs can get the best of both worlds if they keep hitting on late firsts. Wesley already looks like a steal, for example.
Would you rather have 30 million in cap space this year doing nothing or would you rather have an unprotected future first round pick
Wondering the same. You'd think he'd be bought out, but then what would be the plan at PG? I find it hard to believe they go with Jones and if you want to count them, Primo and Wesley.
2 unprotected FRP’s for Poeltl and taking on Westbrick would be great tbh. As much as I’d hate helping the lakers, at this point you have to do what’s best for the franchise and that would definitely be it. Hope the Lakers get desperate and it happens tbh.
They wouldn't be helping them necessarily. The trade will go through some how, the spurs just end up stealing a first from thr lakers without giving anything up. That's a pretty big win over a conference rival who you won't be competing with anytime soon.
Assuming it’s their 2027 FRP, that’s a long ways away from now. Lebron will have retired and AD will be in a wheelchair somewhere. The lakers could be hot ass and in a rebuild by then. Easy trade imo.
I'm more strongly feeling that Durant and Irving remain in Brooklyn. Mitc is another story. NYK need a splash and they'll overpay.
Agnostic about losing Richardson and Poeltl. I suppose it's a favor to move them. To me, Keldon and Vassell are probably checking out already anyway.
It seems like teams are cementing their summer, other than Utah/NYK/etc., so the Spurs' cap space might not get important until the trade deadline. My desires would be to keep Richardson and Poeltl until then, too. I'd rather have team structure to get the young guys going. I don't see it impacting the trade market for those two to wait. I doubt you're getting anything unprotected for Poeltl.
Also, there's something shifting in the NBA in terms of trades and assets. The Dejounte and Gobert trades are setting a high market for under-contract players. This is constantly shifting, may change with the new CBA, etc.
But one impact is that it's starting to freeze some teams out of moving any future picks because they're emptying themselves out. More teams are turning into the Lakers, essentially.
The other impact is that fewer teams are holding more picks. Utah just turned into OKC. The Spurs seem to be aiming for this category. There's a quiet arms race for these huge war chests. I mention because at some point it becomes something else besides just the individual picks. There might be a way that fewer teams are able to set the market for selling/trading some of these picks, essentially.
Poeltl is worth more than fill-in on a trade that perhaps nets a FRP.
Not that I want him to waste the next three years on a terrible Spurs team, but I'd rather keep him than give him away for practically nothing.
The only issue with keeping Poeltl is that he probably adds several wins to the season's total next year.
No. From what I understood: taking Westbrook equals an Unprotected FRP. Sending out Poeltl and/or Richardson equals an additional FRP each.
Let McBuckets be the filler to make the numbers work.
And I'm not convinced Westbrick is as done as he looked on the Lakers. He was the scapegoat on a terrible team. But yes, he has the worst contract possible for an aging point guard. Saving the Lakers does kind of grind the gears though. We know Kyrie and Lebron can play together, so that kind of sucks.
I just don't see how a Spurs/Nets/Lakers trade would work, tbh. Don't the Lakers have some kind of restriction when it comes to trading away first round picks? How are they going to be able to collect enough picks to satisfy both the Nets and Spurs? The Spurs, supossedly, will be cool with one unprotected first, but what about the Nets, who are giving up an all-star level player? After the Murray and Gobbert trade, I don't see Brooklyn accepting anything less than 3 or 4 unprotected firsts. Can the Lakers trade away 4/5 unprotected FRPs?
Westbrook is an expiring, not that bad IMO. But it's a huge number for this upcoming season and I wouldn't settle for just one unprotected 1st rounder for him. Nets/Spurs have the Lakers over a barrel tbh, they should ask for the farm.
The Spurs getting involved in a Lakers/Nets trade has never made sense, but the usual national wags tried to suggest it to keep the dialogue going. The Lakers only have two picks, I believe the 27 and 29, to trade, and Brooklyn would need something for Irving. They would have to add a player or two to even out the contracts, meaning giving another good player to LA. Or the Spurs get involved, splitting the two picks between Brooklyn/San Antonio. Not enough for either side.
Kyrie looks to stay in Brooklyn anyway.
Not giving up Poetl in that trade. Taking Westbrook alone is worth a Lakers unprotected first bare minimum.
The Nets are screwed like the Spurs were when Kawhi demanded trade to Cali - They either play hard ball and he sits out the whole year or they trade him but they not getting 3 or 4 first picks.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)