LMA is gone!

[The Truth #6]

Sometime between the shutdown last March, and the bubble, there was a fundamental organizational change in SSE. I think PATFO sat down and assessed the team to that point in the season, and figured that if they were going to miss the playoffs, they might as well see what they had in the kids. The bubble was the perfect Petri dish to perform their experiment. I believe they had already decided to move on from LMA, and told him to stay home. They wanted to retain DD, though, thinking they might get him at a discount, so they let him participate. Players they had no plans for didn’t play or didn’t play much. Forbes didn’t play at all, and Patty played coach. Marco only played a couple of games to cover minor injuries. The rest of the minutes were covered by the draft picks between 2015 and 2019, and the players they wanted to go forward with minus Luka. They liked what they saw.

After the offseason, they tried to move LMA, and almost did. Bad luck. They didn’t get DD to agree to an extension, but that was always a possibility. They had to pay a bit more for Poeltl than they wanted to, but that turned out to still be a bargain. They began the season,and things were better, but still not optimal. LMA’s defense had fallen off a cliff. It became apparent that he couldn’t start and have us be successful. He refused to come off the bench, so they invented the hip thing while shopping him. The Spurs were rolling, bouncing between the 4 and 6 seeds. Then, COVID. They played through it, but between the weird roster, and the continuing recovery/restart, there was some ground lost.

The point of this long telling is that when you make a fundamental change, sometimes you have to cut away the wreckage. That includes LMA, via trade or buyout, and possibly DD, at this point,although only a trade in that case. You don’t throw good money after bad. You don’t make a trade just to make a trade. You make a trade if you get some good , and don’t have to take too much bad . There are apparently no offers of that type currently on the table for LMA, which is why you wait it out to the deadline.

That’s a really good timeline.

[Ice009]

Not to mention the fact that he was a high school classmate of LeBron.

Was he really? I didn't know that. Is that how he got his foot in the door with the media, or was he already going down that path job wise without knowing Lebron?

[Chinook]

Sometime between the shutdown last March, and the bubble, there was a fundamental organizational change in SSE. I think PATFO sat down and assessed the team to that point in the season, and figured that if they were going to miss the playoffs, they might as well see what they had in the kids. The bubble was the perfect Petri dish to perform their experiment. I believe they had already decided to move on from LMA, and told him to stay home. They wanted to retain DD, though, thinking they might get him at a discount, so they let him participate. Players they had no plans for didn’t play or didn’t play much. Forbes didn’t play at all, and Patty played coach. Marco only played a couple of games to cover minor injuries. The rest of the minutes were covered by the draft picks between 2015 and 2019, and the players they wanted to go forward with minus Luka. They liked what they saw.

After the offseason, they tried to move LMA, and almost did. Bad luck. They didn’t get DD to agree to an extension, but that was always a possibility. They had to pay a bit more for Poeltl than they wanted to, but that turned out to still be a bargain. They began the season,and things were better, but still not optimal. LMA’s defense had fallen off a cliff. It became apparent that he couldn’t start and have us be successful. He refused to come off the bench, so they invented the hip thing while shopping him. The Spurs were rolling, bouncing between the 4 and 6 seeds. Then, COVID. They played through it, but between the weird roster, and the continuing recovery/restart, there was some ground lost.

The point of this long telling is that when you make a fundamental change, sometimes you have to cut away the wreckage. That includes LMA, via trade or buyout, and possibly DD, at this point,although only a trade in that case. You don’t throw good money after bad. You don’t make a trade just to make a trade. You make a trade if you get some good , and don’t have to take too much bad . There are apparently no offers of that type currently on the table for LMA, which is why you wait it out to the deadline.

Yeah, I had come to a similar conclusion. I think the way Murray talked about LMA during camp suggested the team hadn't expected him to come back. They might've even flirted with the idea of cutting him before that, which is why they guaranteed his contract way early. I think that was them deciding against that, maybe in order to be able to trade him for full value. If they end up buying him out, that was obviously a poor decision. They could've used that extra salary space to sign an MLE player or might've been able to slide into some cap space for a Wood or Grant, depending on how they handled the rest of their off-season.

It's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy, though. If this timeline is true, a lot of Aldridge's poor play could be the result of him not wanting to be in SA or knowing SA doesn't want him to be there. The way Jakob's playing, LMA probably shouldn't've started anyway, but Poe didn't exactly start the year off strong either. Could they have gotten Aldridge to snap into a similar contract-year mentality as DeRozan had they not been so keen to go young? I find that worth consideration. Otherwise, I might wonder if there were other deals SA could've made but didn't because they were gambling on getting better offers down the line. Basically, was Young right that the Spurs wanted to deal LMA but "overplayed their hands"? Maybe Miami was willing to swap 20 for 41 back then when they were coming off a Finals appearance. Maybe Boston was willing to play ball before they signed Thompson to a contact.

I dunno. I think what PATFO did with LMA was logical, but I also think they probably did make some mistakes on how they handled it. I used to think it was fine how they treated players, because it fostered loyalty. I don't know if that's the case any more. I guess Kawhi and LMA might just be exceptions to the rule. , even Carroll defended the Spurs recently. There's a big gap between treating guys like pieces of currency and hemming and hawing over any deal like they're choosing to adopt a child. Players during the off-season expect to relocate. It's okay to move them, even if they're not asking for it.

[Thomas82]

Was he really? I didn't know that. Is that how he got his foot in the door with the media, or was he already going down that path job wise without knowing Lebron?

X

[Ice009]

He was already going down that path, but he knew LeBron and even covered him in high school (school newspaper, etc.). He even followed LeBron to Miami when he signed with the Heat.

Darn, I never really looked up any history before. No wonder the guy had what seemed like pretty good info on Lebron back then.

[Thomas82]

Darn, I never really looked up any history before. No wonder the guy had what seemed like pretty good info on Lebron back then.

I found out about their connection when ESPN had that special with LeBron announcing that he was going to Miami.

[daslicer]

Darn, I never really looked up any history before. No wonder the guy had what seemed like pretty good info on Lebron back then.

He was never a high school classmate of Lebron. He is six years older than Lebron but was an alumni of Lebron's highschool which was prestigious private school in Cleveland. He got up front access to Lebron by being an alumni member of that High School.

[Ice009]

He was never a high school classmate of Lebron. He is six years older than Lebron but was an alumni of Lebron's highschool which was prestigious private school in Cleveland. He got up front access to Lebron by being an alumni member of that High School.

Oh OK, that makes more sense. Thanks for the correction. I thought he was older.

[Maddog]

He was already going down that path, but he knew LeBron and even covered him in high school (school newspaper, etc.). He even followed LeBron to Miami when he signed with the Heat.

Windhorst is 43
Lebron 36
Same high school but different years
Windhorst was with Akron news paper and covered Lebron in high school then basically followed him to Cleveland and Miami

[cd021]

Sometime between the shutdown last March, and the bubble, there was a fundamental organizational change in SSE. I think PATFO sat down and assessed the team to that point in the season, and figured that if they were going to miss the playoffs, they might as well see what they had in the kids. The bubble was the perfect Petri dish to perform their experiment. I believe they had already decided to move on from LMA, and told him to stay home. They wanted to retain DD, though, thinking they might get him at a discount, so they let him participate. Players they had no plans for didn’t play or didn’t play much. Forbes didn’t play at all, and Patty played coach. Marco only played a couple of games to cover minor injuries. The rest of the minutes were covered by the draft picks between 2015 and 2019, and the players they wanted to go forward with minus Luka. They liked what they saw.

After the offseason, they tried to move LMA, and almost did. Bad luck. They didn’t get DD to agree to an extension, but that was always a possibility. They had to pay a bit more for Poeltl than they wanted to, but that turned out to still be a bargain. They began the season,and things were better, but still not optimal. LMA’s defense had fallen off a cliff. It became apparent that he couldn’t start and have us be successful. He refused to come off the bench, so they invented the hip thing while shopping him. The Spurs were rolling, bouncing between the 4 and 6 seeds. Then, COVID. They played through it, but between the weird roster, and the continuing recovery/restart, there was some ground lost.

The point of this long telling is that when you make a fundamental change, sometimes you have to cut away the wreckage. That includes LMA, via trade or buyout, and possibly DD, at this point,although only a trade in that case. You don’t throw good money after bad. You don’t make a trade just to make a trade. You make a trade if you get some good , and don’t have to take too much bad . There are apparently no offers of that type currently on the table for LMA, which is why you wait it out to the deadline.

My issue isn't moving on from Aldridge-- this team is obviously better without him now-- its holding on to him too long and then finally moving on from Aldridge with no asset return to show from it.

What you speculated is exactly what I presumed to be the case. They knew that Aldridge wasn't in their long-term plans and wanted to get a long look at the young front court players like Jakob and Eubanks. Both played well and both were capable of being retained, and ultimately were. Assuming that is indeed the case, then why did they not move him in the off-season when he still held value?

Its only now that it appears that moving him would require that they take back bad salary in order to get an asset but he was an asset prior to this season, before he sunk his value with his poor play. It's not like Miami didn't have interest, then, and plus they actually had more flexibility and assets. Now, the Spurs are looking at cutting Aldridge.

They held on to him too long, either hoping that his value would hold up and that they could move him at the deadline or that they could make another playoff run with him helping carry the team.

Neither happened and it's not like the Spurs couldn't have foreseen such a decline, he turns 36 this year and masked some of his decline by shooting 3's at a high clip and percentage. Instead of moving him sooner, for some value, the team is going to take another hit to their rep by buying him out.

[cd021]

Yeah, I had come to a similar conclusion. I think the way Murray talked about LMA during camp suggested the team hadn't expected him to come back. They might've even flirted with the idea of cutting him before that, which is why they guaranteed his contract way early. I think that was them deciding against that, maybe in order to be able to trade him for full value. If they end up buying him out, that was obviously a poor decision. They could've used that extra salary space to sign an MLE player or might've been able to slide into some cap space for a Wood or Grant, depending on how they handled the rest of their off-season.

It's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy, though. If this timeline is true, a lot of Aldridge's poor play could be the result of him not wanting to be in SA or knowing SA doesn't want him to be there. The way Jakob's playing, LMA probably shouldn't've started anyway, but Poe didn't exactly start the year off strong either. Could they have gotten Aldridge to snap into a similar contract-year mentality as DeRozan had they not been so keen to go young? I find that worth consideration. Otherwise, I might wonder if there were other deals SA could've made but didn't because they were gambling on getting better offers down the line. Basically, was Young right that the Spurs wanted to deal LMA but "overplayed their hands"? Maybe Miami was willing to swap 20 for 41 back then when they were coming off a Finals appearance. Maybe Boston was willing to play ball before they signed Thompson to a contact.

I dunno. I think what PATFO did with LMA was logical, but I also think they probably did make some mistakes on how they handled it. I used to think it was fine how they treated players, because it fostered loyalty. I don't know if that's the case any more. I guess Kawhi and LMA might just be exceptions to the rule. , even Carroll defended the Spurs recently. There's a big gap between treating guys like pieces of currency and hemming and hawing over any deal like they're choosing to adopt a child. Players during the off-season expect to relocate. It's okay to move them, even if they're not asking for it.

I think they either held on to Aldridge too long, and tried to hold out for more assets or that they tried to trade him at last years deadline, and in the offseason, but asked for too much. Either way, I think they botched this. Miami has had interest in Aldridge dating back years, and they actually had cap space and assets to get a deal done but the Spurs decided to enter the season with him despite bringing back Poeltl whom they had just committed to.

Even recently there was a report that the Spurs asking price was simply to high for Miami and they decided to pull back rather than meet the asking price. I just don't get their rationale, they had a chance to get assets back but it seems likely that he'll either be waived or bought out.

[cd021]

I am curious , if the lack of suitable trades for Aldridge now makes them strongly consider moving DeRozan to over-compensate for losing Aldridge for nothing. It's not a lock that DeMar returns next season and losing what had been their two best players, plus possibly Gay too, for nothing, seems like a really bad look.

[poopbox]

I kind of think that if the Spurs were interested in Lauri, Pop would have been more active during the Bulls game. He didn't look more attentive than he usually does. I think if he was interested in a guy, he wouldn't waste his last (is there another game with the Bulls?) opportunity to see him first-hand to see if he would fit with the team and if his skills were worth investing in.

I mean however they feel about Lauri isn't going to change with what they see in 2 games from him. If they like him and want him it doesn't matter how bad he plays this year they will pursue him. If they don't like him it wouldn't matter if he dropped 50 in both those games they still wouldn't want him.

[Dejounte]

I am curious , if the lack of suitable trades for Aldridge now makes them strongly consider moving DeRozan to over-compensate for losing Aldridge for nothing. It's not a lock that DeMar returns next season and losing what had been their two best players, plus possibly Gay too, for nothing, seems like a really bad look.

Eh, a lot of Spurs fans would prefer all three of those players gone to benefit the youth movement.

This sounds like a "damned if the Spurs do and damned if the Spurs don't" type of situation when it doesn't need to be. It's only like that when you view it that way and ignore all the other plus factors.

[poopbox]

I do find it funny that there are posters here who talk about how the spurs treating their players right and not just looking to trade them for the best deal has some real impact and yet when they wanted LMA to come of the bench he pouted said no and pretty much left the team never to return... yet the spurs are still going to "do right by him"...

NBA front office version of being a cuck...

[Dverde]

Myles Turner/Jeremy Lamb for LMA and a future draft pick or picks? Pacers are in 10th place and Turner’s name has been thrown out there before.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

I am curious , if the lack of suitable trades for Aldridge now makes them strongly consider moving DeRozan to over-compensate for losing Aldridge for nothing. It's not a lock that DeMar returns next season and losing what had been their two best players, plus possibly Gay too, for nothing, seems like a really bad look.

If they go they won't go for nothing - it'd create $50+ mil of cap space, which can then be used for FAs or for selling it for bad contracts and picks. Getting a 2027 2nd rounder for Gay, for example, isn't worth as much as keeping a rotation player for the rest of the season.

[Dejounte]

I do find it funny that there are posters here who talk about how the spurs treating their players right and not just looking to trade them for the best deal has some real impact and yet when they wanted LMA to come of the bench he pouted said no and pretty much left the team never to return... yet the spurs are still going to "do right by him"...

NBA front office version of being a cuck...

I mean, if anyone needs evidence that this is a positive thing for player relations, just listen to what Dejounte had to say:

But I don't think anyone really wants their mind changed from the fact that what the Spurs are doing benefits anybody, not even when their own player applauds them for doing it.

[exstatic]

My issue isn't moving on from Aldridge-- this team is obviously better without him now-- its holding on to him too long and then finally moving on from Aldridge with no asset return to show from it.

What you speculated is exactly what I presumed to be the case. They knew that Aldridge wasn't in their long-term plans and wanted to get a long look at the young front court players like Jakob and Eubanks. Both played well and both were capable of being retained, and ultimately were. Assuming that is indeed the case, then why did they not move him in the off-season when he still held value?

Its only now that it appears that moving him would require that they take back bad salary in order to get an asset but he was an asset prior to this season, before he sunk his value with his poor play. It's not like Miami didn't have interest, then, and plus they actually had more flexibility and assets. Now, the Spurs are looking at cutting Aldridge.

They held on to him too long, either hoping that his value would hold up and that they could move him at the deadline or that they could make another playoff run with him helping carry the team.

Neither happened and it's not like the Spurs couldn't have foreseen such a decline, he turns 36 this year and masked some of his decline by shooting 3's at a high clip and percentage. Instead of moving him sooner, for some value, the team is going to take another hit to their rep by buying him out.

My issue was guaranteeing his contract for this year all the way back in Oct 2019. If his cost for this season were $6M guaranteed, he would have had much higher value on the trade market last fall. If that didn’t pan out, you cut him, eat the $6M, and move into the season with Poodle as your starter, and no LMA drama to deal with.

[Dejounte]

If they go they won't go for nothing - it'd create $50+ mil of cap space, which can then be used for FAs or for selling it for bad contracts and picks. Getting a 2027 2nd rounder for Gay, for example, isn't worth as much as keeping a rotation player for the rest of the season.

Exactly. We could get someone like Collins this summer and people would still view DeMar as a loss only because it wasn't a direct exchange.

[SAGirl]

Y'all still love Jabroni Young right?

I would not be surprised to hear they overplayed their hand last year. They have overplayed their hand so often these last few years that they haven’t been able to make any good trades.

[poopbox]

I mean, if anyone needs evidence that this is a positive thing for player relations, just listen to what Dejounte had to say:

But I don't think anyone really wants their mind changed from the fact that what the Spurs are doing benefits anybody, not even when their own player applauds them for doing it.

Dejounte Murray is a spurs player who just signed a contract last year. What do expect him to say ? "Nah man LMA that dude quit on us. As ssoon as I started doing something else other than feed him in the post he packed up his ball and went home."

Does any NON spurs player care about this ? Is Lauri going to sign with the spurs cause he knows 5 years from now when he wants to leave the spurs will accommodate him ? Will John Collins sign with the spurs cause he knows in 4 years when he wants to leave they won't ship him to cleveland ? Somehow I think the answer to that is no. I also don't think for a second that if Dejounte every wants to leave the spurs, he is going to stay because the spurs "do right by their players." I do not think their is one player on our team that would stay because of that, if they really wanted to leave.

Also, I took this as a shot at LMA more than anything. "He deserves to be happy." Makes it seem like LMA wasn't happy in SA, even though this is the best team we have had in 3 years...

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Exactly. We could get someone like Collins this summer and people would still view DeMar as a loss only because it wasn't a direct exchange.

Absolutely. It's similar with the LMA situation - they're not getting much if anything for him, everyone knows it. The Spurs need to sign a back up center to replace him while staying under the tax. There's no need to trade him for the sake of trading him unless they're getting that player back in the LMA trade ( say Olynyk, Thompson, Theiss, etc. ). They could identify someone who's a FA.

And no, teams won't send unprotected firsts just to get rid of a bad contract. Cleveland aren't sending their pick with Love for an expiring. Warriors aren't sending their Beal ticket just to get rid of Wiggins, not to mention they'll need his salary for matching purposes in trades, etc.

[exstatic]

Exactly. We could get someone like Collins this summer and people would still view DeMar as a loss only because it wasn't a direct exchange.

The thing is, none of those bad contracts people are trying to move are going anywhere. They’ll be there this summer if the FA thing doesn’t pan out. If you take them now, you close off options. FA, or other trades that may become available after the season.

[Dverde]

Exactly. We could get someone like Collins this summer and people would still view DeMar as a loss only because it wasn't a direct exchange.

The big young FAs are mostly restricted like Collins and Lauri Markkadan and the trend is to match the offers no matter what and not lose “the asset”. We’ll have to overpay a lot to get the teams not to match.