I am for trading one of white or Murray because it hasn't worked. But perhaps we can at least have a look at how it works if DDR is gone.
I am on the Collins wagon. 30 p/y is an overpay, but unfortunately if you pay him what he is worth, Hawks match. Then Spurs could go after McDermott for the rest of the coin. Resign Mills and Dieng . That team is a young, good shooting team with solid defence and vets.
If Collins and DDR get signed, then Spurs should absolutely consider trading White or Murray for a starting shooter.
But atm, there is no news about DDR resigning. I think Spurs go after a starting 4, move Johnson to the 3, and keep White and Murray. I think Vassell could start.
Trade Making is the Achilles' heel of of this FO. If the Front Office of the Spurs were a player, I'd tell him he needed to believe in himself and be more aggressive. I'd use positive reinforcement and gentle but firm persuasion. I'd tell him, "you're not going to improve if you don't push yourself really really hard." The FO is like Danny Green. Drafting is their 3 point shot, but making trades are their handles.
1) Wasn't answered by your rebuttal, because all you did was post some fans who said Murray was "the core". That was a bad counter for two main reasons. The most obvious is that since I didn't say that every fan thought that way, showing a sample of the opposite isn't really relevant. It would be like if I said, "There are a lot of blue balloons in this bag", you can rustle around there, pull out a handful of red balloons and say, "See? I destroyed your whole argument". The reason is that the posts on reddit you cited used terms like core or franchise to describe Murray (and White). Those are terms that describe how a team values one of their players, not how other teams do. I agree that Murray is likely the Spurs' core and franchise player in the sense that I do think the Spurs view him highly and promote him as the face of the team. What that doesn't mean though is that those fans of other teams want Murray to have the same status on their teams. It's the same way that Wiggins is considered to be a solid piece of GS' core by GS fans, but no one else views him as a positive trade asset.
What I will say is I was using a narrow scope when talking about "young players". I obviously don't mean guys like Eubanks, Jones and Weatherspoon. I also wasn't counting Samanic or even Walker. I was basically talking about Murray, White, Johnson and Vassell, since those are the players who come up most often in trade talks (besides DeRozan, who doesn't count because he's old).
Anyway, you can show a lot of fans loving DJM, but that doesn't counter that a lot of them don't. I think you're missing that. Both ideas can co-exist with evidence. Yes, I believe your statement, but I also believe my statement.
People have been obsessed with the idea of other team's fans not loving Murray or what I had him traded for, but that wasn't the point of the post I made. The point was a quick trade to basically remove him from the team without having to worry about the incoming player and where they'd play. That means just a cap-space trade. New York is the non-Spurs leader in that regard, and Thibs apparently wants a PG. So bam, he goes there, a pick comes back and we can get to free agency with just some Tank-a-Thon swap-ins for picks (like I didn't even pick 41 because that wasn't the point). Then the team can get to a roster that promotes positive growth for their young players than the dog-eat-dog offense they have last year that relied too much on every player taking turns with individual creation. And the defense could improve due to Vassell's and Johnon's growth and replacing DeRozan with a positive defender with size for his position. Add in that the two rookies are both positive defenders, and it's probably a better unit over all.
This is an amazing post. Do you work as a lawyer or in politics? The complete opposite of The Drew Show, yet you arrive at poetry in your own way.
I basically agree with your overall points. I think trading Dejounte makes basketball sense, despite Pop most likely never considering it. I would keep him as an off ball guard, but he would likely never consider that either, and so trading high has merit. Will his trade value be higher next season? Quite possibly. If Pop leaves, which I’m reluctant to accept yet have some hope for because Hardy left and perhaps realized he wasn’t next in line, then maybe the FO will be able to operate slightly differently with trading players.
So I have no idea why you're singularly focused on the reddit link when I already addressed it by saying "maybe I didn't capture what you were looking for in the link". You're rehashing something I acknowledged in the post you quoted, and then arrived to the same point I did with this text:
...which matches my overarching point of "present it here but that is MY experience just like yours is YOUR experience with RealGM."
If a lot of fans of other teams consider DJ to have the least value and you also acknowledge that there are a lot of fans who think the opposite, then it sounds a rabbit hole-type conversation.
There's no real way to settle this (of why your statement should be more believed than my statement, or vice versa) unless a universal poll was taken and we both agree on the terms.
So if other teams consider him one of the least valuable young players and we consider him one of the most valuable young players why would we trade him? There would be no agreement on value. Part of the reason any trade happens is because people agree on value. 5 one dollar bills and a $5 bill have the same value monetarily and usually is pretty easy to change however sometimes people may not be willing to do that because they enjoy the flexibility of the 1s more or the like the ease of carrying just one bill.
Man, YOU took special issue with something I said (which wasn't the point of the post it was contained in). And are now like, "Yeah, I guess we can just agree to disagree on that." My post was never about Murray's trade value. That was a critique you and other posters here decided to try to wage. I don't really care if GMs would trade the first-overall for him or demand the Spurs trade four firsts to get rid of him. That wasn't the point.
But that didn't mean there weren't things to talk about, like the difference between being a "core player" and having trade value. Insofar as our discourse had a workable core, it was there. I totally understand you not wanting to get into that, and I'm cool with leaving the discussion here. I think we should leave most of the detail on trade proposals to other threads anyway, but something as big as trading Murray or White obviously has a huge pull on what the team would or could do in free agency, so talking about it in broad strokes makes sense here.
Although the input of fans give a sense of what value a player gives to their team, in the end it doesn’t matter since it’s the front office who pulls off the trades. What’s probably more important is knowing the team you follow and I think many people forget how the Spurs are run: risk averse, values continuity, doesn’t make big splashes.
Special issue? I'm sorry no one ever in the history of this board picked apart someone else's post and has focused on any single matter. It's not a matter of "agreeing to disagree", I've laid out the framework of why it doesn't make sense to agree. If that still doesn't make sense, oh well.
Because "value" is a bull concept. You don't win games by having more "value" than the other team. (In my opinion) the Spurs should trade Murray because developing around White, Vassell and Johnson as the perimeter unit with a strong PF (doesn't have to be Collins as there are other options) gives the Spurs a balanced roster on both ends while also letting their young perimeter players grow in an environment that's conducive to development of good habits. I don't believe that will exist with Murray, White and Johnson all as key perimeter players, and I'm concerned that Murray in particular won't let himself be the role-player he actually is He's become too entrenched in the team's iden y for his talent level.
You have to be willing to cycle players when you rebuild rather than just let them sit there and age. The team needs to be aggressive in leveraging the value they have toward that goal, so moving Murray makes more sense than moving White (who's actually way better than Murray -- like to a point where I don't think ST really understands), Walker (who has no trade value and is already on the bench) or Johnson (who plays a different position that only conflicts with Murray in the sense that both primary score by driving). Could you trade White and have a lot of the same flexibility? Yes, but I think the team now and in the future would be worse.
Obviously PATFO might see it differently, but I disagree with them and then them considering Murray the core when he's so obviously (in my opinion) not is one of the main things holding back the team.
Way better? There’s no way that this can be the case if he’s always hurt. I like Derrick a lot as a player and I want him to succeed but his health is a huge question mark. DeJounte had his ACL injury in the past but he played every game that he suited up for this season. “The best ability is availability” is something that holds true in this case.
Even with this logic you have to make a trade that makes sense. Cycling players for the sake of cycling puts you at even worse odds of improving your team.
DJ is probably worth a lottery pick to a playoff or near playoff team but no bottom of the barrel team is going to give you a lottery pick because the potential for a star player outweighs DJ who’s not going to move the needle on a team.
On the other end of this moving DJ for a pick that falls 18 or later is crazy stupid. Especially on his contract. We’re not going to return anything worthwhile on paper and the potential for a star at those picks doesn’t justify the move.
The only smart play is if there’s an opportunity to package him up for a proven star and I don’t see any deal like that out there. Not when a team like GS is actively looking for the same thing with better assets to offer. He’ll even the Pacers could put a more enticing package together over DJ, the 12th and a prospect.
Yes, way better. And I'm not talking about the fictional version of White that's durable. I mean White, fragile as he is and who tends to come back from injuries slowly when he does play, is way better than Murray. I think STer have fallen into this belief that there's some kind of debate about them where you can choose your horse and it's just a matter of opinion or whatever, but if you open up a stat sheet, you'll see it's not close and never has been. That's obviously true in terms of rate stats, but it's also true when it comes to aggregate impact stats. Even this season, where DJM played more than twice as many minutes, he got 4.1 WAR compared to White's 4.0. That's the kind of injury disparity you need to make them equal.
This also ignores that you don't HAVE to build around either of them. It's not like if White is ultimately unable to carry the load, it makes trade Murray retroactively bad. In a case where the Spurs did trade DJM, they can and should pay a hefty price for a backup PG who can carry a bigger load when called upon ala Payne or Jackson. In the very least they should invest in a developmental PG to compete with Jones like with Butler in my original post. No one's pretending like White is going to be healthy his whole career. But he doesn't have to be for it to make sense for the Spurs to move Murray.
You can't go into rebuilding with the idea that you'll just keep everybody. That's true if the rest of my post (which is basically that the Spurs can be a better team than they are now both now and in the future even if they basically just gave Murray away) flows through. If that's the case, then "just keeping" Murray because you didn't find a contender with a lotto pick would actively be stalling the roster. That's how cleaving to "value" can hamper an organization.
Of course, this is when you'd come back saying that my post actually doesn't flow through and that Murray makes the team better and so on. I disagree with that and the stats back that up. Because I don't think Murray has a really high return threshold, I don't see any dissonance between what teams offer and what the Spurs need to get back to justify the trade. I think basically getting out of his contact and getting a first in the high 20s has the potential to work out for them way more than getting a pick in the 10-18 range with bad salary would. Are there trades in that vein that could be great? Yes. And I'd love if like Philly thought Murray was a large incentive in a Simmons trade. I'm not turning away teams that are offering more. But in my mind, the key benefit in trading Murray would Murray being on another team so the Spurs can build and offensive system that lets the perimeter players grow. I want the best return the Spurs can get within that context, but I don't think them running back the same perimeter guys on the roster is a good outcome for the team.
It’s absolutely time to consolidate pieces. The Murray v White debate really doesn’t matter as much as what comes back, and if it helps provide a clearer logic/structure to a rebuild than what currently is the case.
I agree. This year should be a great opportunity to consolidate and upgrade our pieces especially because of the sign and trade possibilities with our vets.
Yeah now is as good a time as any to trade Murray. I believe he is what he is at this point. He’s never going to be a 3 point shooter. You keep White simply bc the defense is comparable, his shooting is better (and at the very least he takes 3s), and his floor vision is much better in the pic n roll. I mean if we draft that big man Sengun, trade DJ to NY and then draft Duarte wouldn’t that solve a lot of issues our team has? we could still use the money on Collins and then our team looks pretty damn interesting. We could even ship off Poodle while we are at it.
White/ Tre
Lonnie/ Duarte
KJ/ Vassell
Luka, another cheap pick up
Collins/ Sengun/ Goran
I generally agree that White is significantly more useful than Murray, and that Murray with White makes for an awkward fit that probably makes things harder rather than easier. And if I had to choose one to go with in the future, it would be White.
But I also think that Murray has a reasonable contract, but perhaps even more importanly ....
I don't think there's much of a market for him. Non-shooting or non-self-generating point guards who also are not great pick and roll players ... who needs them? Point Guard is one of the more clogged positions in the league, and the teams that are looking for them aren't looking for guys who can't shoot.
Chicago might want Lonzo Ball to play defense and do occasional ball handling, but he also can spread the floor. Dallas or Philly might want Conley or Lowry to take charge and spread the floor, that doesn't make Murray a good consolation prize.
I don't even buy him in New York. He doesn't seem like a Thibs guy to me. If he gets screamed at by Thibs instead of the kid gloves he's gotten in SA he might want to throw hands. Imagine the NY media cesspool amplifying Murray's unstable social media attention chasing and things could go bad for him quickly, and he's not going to be adding space to Randle or Barrett.
So I think the Spurs are more or less stuck with him. He's not bad enough that it would make sense to dump him for nothing and he's not good enough to generate demand to get solid assets back.
He's Ricky Rubio with a phone stuck in his hand. Rubio's last two teams vastly improved once they got rid of him and replaced him with a guard who could shoot and Rubio was only desired by the Wolves for his mentorship and locker room presence. Nobody's looking to place Murray in the same role.
Rebuilding doesn’t have to exist on one end of the pendulum. There’s a number ways to look at the flaws in your logic but another one that sticks out is the reality that this team has no iden y and no star player. I’m not suggesting we simply collect neutral or net negative players but there’s no sense in moving an above average core player for a late 1st round pick.
Perhaps you do that if you’re a solid playoff team and you can get a lessor role player that’s a better fit or fills a need and the first balances the trade. Otherwise it’s makes no sense. Patience right now is one of the most undervalued aspects of a rebuild. We would be so much better off stacking mid level players and then using them to level up to better player or moving them for pieces that are a better fit after you get your star or better define your team iden y.
He’s not even on a bad contract and you want to move him for a pick that is likely to return a player with less potential. Doesn’t make sense.
The issue is there's no benefit of collecting positive-value players in a vacuum. Having value isn't the same thing as being good, and while it would be nice to have value to use to become good, you need to actually use that value and not just hold onto it. Of course, Murray isn't actually an "above-average core player". That's the kind of thinking that needs to stop. What Murray is is an average starter with pluses and minuses that is marketed as a franchise player and gets the touches of a first option. He has value -- I'd argue he'd have more value away from the Spurs than with them -- but the idea that a early 20's pick and no returning salary is a cheap package is optimistic. I'd love for it to be more, but there's not a high bar for what's too little, because the reality of keeping him, of putting him in the "core" of catering the offense to him, to giving him a disproportionate level of credit for the defense -- that reality is a negative. It holds the team back all on its own.
And you can see it in the people who challenge the idea of the team drafting guards by citing the guards on the team. As if any of them matter in that regard. The team needs to be able to cycle the players, not just in terms of the roster but also in terms of the roles. Murray is going into his sixth season. We're not talking about patience or the lack of it. He doesn't have to be a confirmed bust to move him. It just has to be part of a plan to keep moving forward. The team can obviously move forward in scenarios where they just dump Murray. This continues to not be argued against. If we're not arguing that trading Murray for 21 makes the team worse, if we're just talking about value for value's sake, then we aren't talking about anything at this point.
It's not a coincidence that the Spurs keep drafting "steals". I think Spurs fans have bought into that praise so much that they confuse it for reality. The truth is that average potential for NBA players is way higher than some believe. It doesn't mean the draft is a crapshoot, but it does mean that they are always guys in the 20s or later who will be good players.He’s not even on a bad contract and you want to move him for a pick that is likely to return a player with less potential. Doesn’t make sense.
2014: Anderson -- A guy who's been a better player than Murray
2015: Miluntinov -- Obviously this pick will never be okay, but they passed up on comparable or better players than Murray to waste this pick.
2016: Murray -- as good as Murray.
2017: White -- Way better than Murray
2018: Walker -- Not better than Murray. In general that draft hasn't looked great after 18. Still, there are a couple of players like Robinson and Trent that are highly regarded, with Robinson having "potential" and Trent in line for a similar contract to Murray
2019: Samanic, Johnson -- Johnson's another late-first "steal". Samanic is bleh. The Spurs passed up on two player comparable to Murray in terms of early impact, but we don't know enough to know if they'll develop.
2020: Vassell -- Think his potential is better than Murray and that he'll show that soon. But it's definitely too early to know how many of the players picked later in the draft will rise.
I don't think it makes sense to assume the Spurs will struggle to find a guard with similar potential to Murray. He's not one of the uber prospects of the NBA. There are a number of guards projected to go in the 20s in this upcoming draft, and a lot of them are taller and good defenders. I'm not going to say they'll all be better than Murray, but one of them is likely to be.
Anderson better than Murray ? when ? i don't understand the thing with Murray. Why going for a pick when you already have the guy, who is in progress every year.
Presuming Butler's heart isn't projected to impact his career anytime soon, I'd be down with 21 and a flier on Knox (though I don't think the Knicks would do it).
I've long argued this.
In a vacuum, he was a good value pick at 29, has a decent contract and has worked his way into being a decent player.
In reality, good lucking finding a team who wants a so called "PG", who can't shoot or get to the line, is a sub par play maker and has delusions of grandeur. More than an undesirable archetype, virtually the an hesis of what teams are looking for.
Hey guys! That Hawks insider guy NBASupes posted this today, mentions the spurs going for a full rebuild.
In info I just got hot off the presser is who could be shopped or are being shopped. This list is WOW! I only got big names.
For us, just JC is seeking SnT options via agent. I am hearing there is interest in JC right now for a SnT but as a main FA is lukewarm due to the salary demands. I still lean to Atlanta and JC will work out a deal on Day 1 of the moratorium but if JC wants the most money, a SnT is the route. I am hearing the teams who are interested in JC for a SnT want to add him for a player on their roster. The teams I am hearing are interested is Dallas, Memphis, Miami, Minny, Portland, SAC, Indy, and Houston. As I've said and others have said, things are fluid. If a lot of these teams start missing on guys, JC could be a main target but what I was told, they want him at a certain price and that price is cheaper than what ATL already offered. Memphis is the intriguing team in all of this. A SnT of JC for JJJ would be a deal I think Atlanta would consider not saying it was offered behind the scenes. Since the Bogigate, teams are more careful about leaks and leaves it to the agents.
Guys getting shopped in the East:
M. Smart - Seeking upgrade
T. Young - Seeking upgrade
C. Sexton - Rookie Contract Questions
M. Bamba - Rookie Contract Questions
K. Love - Wants Out, possible buyout
M. Turner - Seeking assets or better fit with Sabonis
M. Brogdon - Seeking upgrade
T. Ross - Seeking assets
B. Simmons - Seeking upgrade
P. Siakam - They are looking to see if there is a GREAT deal on the market. Right now, there is not a great deal yet.
A, Baynes - Seeking assets
R. Westbrook - His agent asked to test the market and see if a contender is interested
D. Bertans - Seeking upgrade
The seeking upgrades are hard to get as you can tell. Simmons is on the market but they want like a J. Tatum type, if that's the case, you will likely not see a trade. There are a lot of Rookie Contract Questions for this 2018 class. I didn't add the guys who have no value like Knox.
In the West. I am also hearing San Antonio is strongly considering rebuilding as an option. That could mean DeRozan, Mills, and Gay are available for cheaper than expected. They are another team that could be holding contracts that are less desirable for draft assets. They are still keeping their great contracts guys.
D. Powell - Seeking upgrade
M. Kleber - Seeking upgrade
WCS - Seeking upgrade
K. Porzingis - Seeking upgrade
An. Wiggins - Seeking upgrade
J. Wall - Asked to be on the trading block to see what his market is like. I am told, there is NO interest in Wall. Ouch!
E. Gordon - Seeking upgrade
D. House Jr - Seeking upgrade
D. Augustin - Willing to trade him for free. He might be a Kris Dunn option.
L. Kennard - Seeking upgrade
Rondo - Seeking upgrade
Harrell (if opts in) - Seeking upgrade
Kuzma - Seeking upgrade
J. Jackson Jr - Rookie Contract Questions
Culver - Seeking upgrade or asset
Rubio - Seeking upgrade
Okogie - Seeking upgrade
Lon. Ball - Same as JC, SnT options. Like JC, his SnT market is booming compared to his FA market which is stale. When you are demanding the salary they want, teams are reluctant.
S. Adams - Seeking upgrade or better fit with Zion
E. Bledsoe - Seeking upgrade or asset
K. Walker- - Seeking upgrade or asset
Mikal Bridges - Rookie Contract Questions
C. McCollum - Seeking upgrade
J. Nurkic - Seeking upgrade
A. Simons - Seeking upgrade
B. Hield - Seeking better fit or fits, not looking to downgrade but if they can save 5-10 million, they will be willing to take less talent wise.
M. Bagley III - Cap Issues and Rookie Contract Questions, could be had for cheap depending on R. Holmes FA status. SAC wants to keep Holmes as a priority.
D. Murray - Seeking major assets
D. White - Seeking major assets
JJJ, Mikal, and the Spurs news kinda shocked me. I was told, Mikal is a priority but the market for next year, they are saying, he could be a max kat. This is a team that has to pay CP3 the 2 year max this offseason, Ayton the max, already paying Booker. It's gonna be a serious question. I will say odds are, they try to work out a deal but if the max kat rumors are true, it's gonna be hard for PHX to keep him. I am told, he's a higher priority than CP3 so that's good and bad.
Good for Bridges but bad for CP3 but if they win it all, he might be back. People think Bridges is worth 4/85 but there are teams who will have money next year willing to max him out considering how hard it's to find his type. We seen this before with Otto Porter Jr. although Bridges has more potential than OPJ. JJJ is interesting. His people think he's a max kat while the org thinks he's a 4/60 million kat. He's likely unavailable outside of an upgrade but the fact that Memphis is interested in JC in a SnT says he could be had. I was told his trade value isn't bad but it's not Siakam either. His injuries and lack of improvement been noted.
Of course, SA rebuilding is a shock. It's not what they do but they are finding themselves as a rock in a hard place. Too good to be bad and too bad too be good. My guess is they are looking into a quick rebuild (2-3 year rebuild). I am hearing they have major interest in the players in this draft and could move their PGs for major upgrades.
^this guy didn’t get anything right during the trade deadline. I remember his words because I posted them. The dude is a conman.
Probably soooo but I’m almost certain he called the hawks signing Gallo and bogi
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
