Anyone feel that the trade for Fox backfired?

[baseline bum]

Nah CP3 and Evin are the odd men out. Hate to not bring Chris back after how much he did for the team but there will be no minutes for him and he's not gonna want to play as a deep bench reserve in the Wesley role.

[Joseph Kony]

Not at all. Spurs gave up dead weight and one of their own picks for Fox. If needed they can always ship him out to fill out the roster. All-star PG in hand >>>> theoretical pieces

[Chinook]

It didn't backfire. However, if we could guarantee Harper would still be a Spurs' pick, I don't think it's a stretch to say the Spurs would be in a very interesting position had it not happened.

They'd go into draft night with

2, 12, 14
SAS/ATL 2026
SAS27, ATL 27
SAS/BOS 2028
SAS29
SAS/DAL/MIN 2030
SAS/SAC 2031
SAS32

They could draft Harper and use their two mid-firsts and their multiple expirings to bring in vets, then use Vasselldon and some of those future picks to go star hunting.

I don't think Fox was as big of a steal as many Spurs fans are arguing. Yes, it was a fine enough trade given that it didn't cut into the quick. But the Spurs gave a lot more than many teams could. It was a comparable if not greater package than they got for DJM or that the Hawks got for him. With the new CBA limiting the number of max contracts a team can realistically have, teams have to see Fox as a top two guy on their roster to justify trading for him and paying him, even before getting into compensation. Just like with Markkanen, the new deal is going to cut his value a lot unless he takes less to preserve long-term flexibility. It's not a no-brainer that he'll have resale value in a couple of years that's worth more than what the Spurs paid to get him.

The worst part of the Fox trade is that it's causing folks to think a Giannis trade makes sense. If the Spurs had Wemby, Castle and Harper, the goal would have been trying to put guys around them to develop their growth and potentially bring in a star with those extra assets if things looked good. Now, with a 28-year-old Fox, a lot of people think the Spurs are on a timeline that requires them to make a big move. Wemby is coming off health scare and needs development, but it's overshadowed by them already having a second star who doesn't have many prime years left. Combine that with Wemby's desire to win-now, and one could think the Spurs are a Giannis away from legit contention.

With all that said, the trade didn't backfire. The Spurs should try to see what they have with their roster when Fox and Wemby get some time to grow together. The team still has some assets to try to put a team together around their core. But their margin for error is smaller now. They have to get the Fox/Castle/Harper fit right to really open up the team's chances. They have the assets to make another big move, but they can basically only afford the one. It has to be the finishing piece, or else they probably can't make it work until after Fox is off the team.

[Mikesatx]

Fox is going to be a great Spur.

[Dex]

No

[InRareForm]

How times change, Several years ago we were praying josh primo would be good , now we have 3 stud guards

[Dverde]

Maybe Spurs make a run again for Lauri instead of Fox with their assets in the offseason. I like Fox and no regrats, I would never expect us to get another top 4 pick.

[kht]

We got Fox insanely cheap... multiple seasons of 25 ppg... clutch moments in his short time with the Spurs with a bad hand at all.

[Mr. Body]

Definitely not. They got a really nice player for very, very little. It'll be a bit of a headache figuring out the parts, but it's a great kind of headache to have.

[CorrectCrusader]

It's hilarious that we have a surplus of elite guard talent and people think it's a backfire.
Talent is what wins in this league.

[Darkwaters]

If Spurs going to keep the #2 pick and get Harper....Fox seems to be the odd one out

No

[CorrectCrusader]

It didn't backfire. However, if we could guarantee Harper would still be a Spurs' pick, I don't think it's a stretch to say the Spurs would be in a very interesting position had it not happened.

They'd go into draft night with

2, 12, 14
SAS/ATL 2026
SAS27, ATL 27
SAS/BOS 2028
SAS29
SAS/DAL/MIN 2030
SAS/SAC 2031
SAS32

They could draft Harper and use their two mid-firsts and their multiple expirings to bring in vets, then use Vasselldon and some of those future picks to go star hunting.

I don't think Fox was as big of a steal as many Spurs fans are arguing. Yes, it was a fine enough trade given that it didn't cut into the quick. But the Spurs gave a lot more than many teams could. It was a comparable if not greater package than they got for DJM or that the Hawks got for him. With the new CBA limiting the number of max contracts a team can realistically have, teams have to see Fox as a top two guy on their roster to justify trading for him and paying him, even before getting into compensation. Just like with Markkanen, the new deal is going to cut his value a lot unless he takes less to preserve long-term flexibility. It's not a no-brainer that he'll have resale value in a couple of years that's worth more than what the Spurs paid to get him.

The worst part of the Fox trade is that it's causing folks to think a Giannis trade makes sense. If the Spurs had Wemby, Castle and Harper, the goal would have been trying to put guys around them to develop their growth and potentially bring in a star with those extra assets if things looked good. Now, with a 28-year-old Fox, a lot of people think the Spurs are on a timeline that requires them to make a big move. Wemby is coming off health scare and needs development, but it's overshadowed by them already having a second star who doesn't have many prime years left. Combine that with Wemby's desire to win-now, and one could think the Spurs are a Giannis away from legit contention.

With all that said, the trade didn't backfire. The Spurs should try to see what they have with their roster when Fox and Wemby get some time to grow together. The team still has some assets to try to put a team together around their core. But their margin for error is smaller now. They have to get the Fox/Castle/Harper fit right to really open up the team's chances. They have the assets to make another big move, but they can basically only afford the one. It has to be the finishing piece, or else they probably can't make it work until after Fox is off the team.

The 2, 12, 14 thing is assuming that everything goes identical had we not traded the chicago pick. We all know they wouldn't have conveyed had we not traded them the pick.

[DPG21920]

Two of the biggest lessons from the playoffs are that you need many ballhandlers who can create for themselves and for others, and also that depth is incredibly valuable.

Fox, Castle and Harper can coexist and at the same time one of them could eventually be a centrepiece for a good trade down the line.

So no.

Well said - Spurs are in a much better position post trade with Fox (both on the court and just in terms of asset valuation)

[Mal]

If Spurs going to keep the #2 pick and get Harper....Fox seems to be the odd one out

No. Harper is a prospect, and Spurs are in no position to wait for another high end prospect to pan out. They get all-star level player in Fox for close to nothing.

[twodeep]

I guess Keldon and Vassell and Champaigne will get push further down the bench

Bye bye to Makalai and Wesley.

Oh wait CP3's contract has ended correct?

Champaigne is a shooter what we need to do is unload Vassel and Keldon

[Kevin]

No. Spurs got Fox for about 30 cents on the dollar because Fox and Klutch tanked his value by demanding that he only be traded to the San Antonio.

A full price offer on the open market would have included Castle and one of the 25 or 27 ATL picks.

Seems like the FO just plans to get lucky and somehow it keeps working. In poker terms it doesn't matter what cards they're dealt the river bails them out for a Royal Flush (Wemby) and three full house's in row in Fox/Castle/Harper. Spurs could get 2/10 unsuited and turn that into a full house on the flop.

[rjv]

OKC is having success because of their depth while the Nuggets are running out of gas and you're asking whether or not we should have picked up Fox?

[DPG21920]

I dont value any players Spurs gave up tbh, but Spurs gave up pick 12 this year, SA 27 and MIN 31. It’s not nothing but it was still a very good deal especially factoring in Zach’s negative contract. But it was a good price and overall I think SA easily break evens if not profits.

[spurraider21]

Absolutely not. You got him at a discount! Really only gave up 2 1sts and some roster trash. The bulls would have tanked into the top 10 and the hornets pick was never going to convey.

no. we gave up the bulls first, which would have conveyed this year based on how things ended up, and if not, still had 2 more years of fairly likely conveyance

we gave up the spurs 27 pick, and the wolves 31 pick.

the fake pick we gave up was the hornets pick

[paperboy77]

We need some veteran leadership so Fox fills that role and there are 96 minutes for the guards so in theory 32 minutes for each of them. Harper is a rookie so he can come off the bench and whoever is hot finishes the game. Castle can play few minutes at the 3 if we want all of them at the same time.

I’m more concerned with the big, we need rebounding and some strength for big players.

Who's our 3 that you are guaranteeing starter minutes for? Vassell needs to got to the bench like yesterday... and like it.

[paperboy77]

If Spurs going to keep the #2 pick and get Harper....Fox seems to be the odd one out

You can't still be entertaining the thought of starting Devin or Champ right? Roll out Castle at the 3 full time. The two and the three have always been interchangeable historically... "position-wise". Just look at the Knicks. They roll out Brunson, Hart, and Bridges. 6/2, 6/4 and 6/6.

[spurraider21]

It didn't backfire. However, if we could guarantee Harper would still be a Spurs' pick, I don't think it's a stretch to say the Spurs would be in a very interesting position had it not happened.

They'd go into draft night with

2, 12, 14
SAS/ATL 2026
SAS27, ATL 27
SAS/BOS 2028
SAS29
SAS/DAL/MIN 2030
SAS/SAC 2031
SAS32

They could draft Harper and use their two mid-firsts and their multiple expirings to bring in vets, then use Vasselldon and some of those future picks to go star hunting.

I don't think Fox was as big of a steal as many Spurs fans are arguing. Yes, it was a fine enough trade given that it didn't cut into the quick. But the Spurs gave a lot more than many teams could. It was a comparable if not greater package than they got for DJM or that the Hawks got for him. With the new CBA limiting the number of max contracts a team can realistically have, teams have to see Fox as a top two guy on their roster to justify trading for him and paying him, even before getting into compensation. Just like with Markkanen, the new deal is going to cut his value a lot unless he takes less to preserve long-term flexibility. It's not a no-brainer that he'll have resale value in a couple of years that's worth more than what the Spurs paid to get him.

The worst part of the Fox trade is that it's causing folks to think a Giannis trade makes sense. If the Spurs had Wemby, Castle and Harper, the goal would have been trying to put guys around them to develop their growth and potentially bring in a star with those extra assets if things looked good. Now, with a 28-year-old Fox, a lot of people think the Spurs are on a timeline that requires them to make a big move. Wemby is coming off health scare and needs development, but it's overshadowed by them already having a second star who doesn't have many prime years left. Combine that with Wemby's desire to win-now, and one could think the Spurs are a Giannis away from legit contention.

With all that said, the trade didn't backfire. The Spurs should try to see what they have with their roster when Fox and Wemby get some time to grow together. The team still has some assets to try to put a team together around their core. But their margin for error is smaller now. They have to get the Fox/Castle/Harper fit right to really open up the team's chances. They have the assets to make another big move, but they can basically only afford the one. It has to be the finishing piece, or else they probably can't make it work until after Fox is off the team.

i guess the question would be, had the spurs not made the fox trade and the situation is exactly as you have set forth above, and on the day before the draft the Kings approached the spurs with the same Fox trade (i know Tre Jones expired, but lets just put that aside for the uprpose of iscussion)... would the spurs trade for Fox knowing they have #2?

its an unfair question since the spurs seemed like they wanted to make a play-in push this season with Fox and a (then) healty wemby, and this scenario excludes that

[Kevin]

Its crazy that the Spurs got a top 25ish player at age 27 for a bundle of mostly junk assets.

Zollins: bad contract. Junk

Tre Jones: half season rental of Tre is worth a second rounder three years in the future. Mostly junk

Hornets pick: never conveying as a first but its turned into second rounders. Mostly junk.

Bulls pick: doesn't convey this year if the Spurs hold on to it. Might convey in future years. Jury is out.

2027 Spurs first round pick: a pick three years from now that figures to be in the 25-30 range. Mostly junk barring something catastrophic for the Spurs.

2031 T-Wolves pick: a first round pick seven years from now. It's a lotto ticket. You might hit the mega million dollar jackpot but you shouldn't count on it.

[LeBowen]

You can't still be entertaining the thought of starting Devin or Champ right? Roll out Castle at the 3 full time. The two and the three have always been interchangeable historically... "position-wise". Just look at the Knicks. They roll out Brunson, Hart, and Bridges. 6/2, 6/4 and 6/6.

We don't need to shove everyone into the starting lineup for the sake of egos, there are 96 guard minutes available and Fox/Castle/Harper should all get 30+. Whoever is doing better on that given night closes the game out, simple.
Devin can't start anymore, he's had his chances.
Barnes has to start because he's our by far the best shooter, but is undersized at PF.
We need to get a legit 6'9-6'11 PF who's going to help Wemby on the glass because that was our biggest issue this season.

[Arguendo]

If Spurs going to keep the #2 pick and get Harper....Fox seems to be the odd one out

Not backfired for Spurs...we got him for great value. He'll likely be very important for us to mature into a playoff team and hopefully contender over the next 3 years.
Prolly backfired for him, Castle developed sooner than anticipated then the lottery gifted us a Castle-sized, Cade-comp'ed primary ball handler who grew up the son of a 5x i 6 yrs Champ hearing stories about MJ/Pippen/Shaq/Kobe/Phil. And Vassell is locked in for like 4 more years and prolly hard to move.

Good news is 3 of Fox, Castle, Harper, & Vassell can work the court, very nice rotation, but for Spurs LT Castle and Harper need primary handler reps and Fox loses most of his value off ball. But Wemby/Castle/Harper should be our focus moving forward, unless we can swing a Giannis level trade.
For the next 2-3yrs, its a good problem to have. Hopefully Fox comes in, acknowledges playing in SA/TX saves him 8% compared to playing in Cali, and offers to take a cut instead of a Max to play for a contender in the back-half of his career.