2024 NBA Draft Thread

[scott]

I’d offer our ‘25 FRP (unprotected), ‘27 FRP (unprotected), the CHA pick and the CHI pick. If they’ll take Branham and Sochan that would be a bonus for us.

[TD 21]

Unless the Nets are sky high on Topic, I have a hard time believing they'd trade Bridges for anyone else in this draft. Sarr sounds similar to Claxton, only the latter is proven, won't break the bank nor demand touches because he doesn't have the pedigree/pressure of being a 1st overall pick.

They clearly think being in New York, having a core that fits most stars well (Bridges, Claxton, Johnson) and a readymade package for another (Thomas, big expiring contracts + draft capital from Harden/Durant/Irving trades), they could conceivably get back in championship contention sooner than later.

Rather than the Spurs blowing their load on a player who wouldn't solve the lead creator issue, they'd be better off selecting Risacher and doing so for Mitc instead.

[baseline bum]

Unless the Nets are sky high on Topic, I have a hard time believing they'd trade Bridges for anyone else in this draft. Sarr sounds similar to Claxton, only the latter is proven, won't break the bank nor demand touches because he doesn't have the pedigree/pressure of being a 1st overall pick.

They clearly think being in New York, having a core that fits most stars well (Bridges, Claxton, Johnson) and a readymade package for another (Thomas, big expiring contracts + draft capital from Harden/Durant/Irving trades), they could conceivably get back in championship contention sooner than later.

Rather than the Spurs blowing their load on a player who wouldn't solve the lead creator issue, they'd be better off selecting Risacher and doing so for Mitc instead.

Mitc 's starting to look like empty calories and I wouldn't break the bank for him. And I disagree, the Spurs' biggest problem is defensive ineptness with Branham, Sochan, Johnson, and Collins.

[baseline bum]

I’d offer our ‘25 FRP (unprotected), ‘27 FRP (unprotected), the CHA pick and the CHI pick. If they’ll take Branham and Sochan that would be a bonus for us.

No way they're doing that without the Atlanta 25 if they're not getting the Spurs 24.

[TD 21]

Mitc 's starting to look like empty calories and I wouldn't break the bank for him. And I disagree, the Spurs' biggest problem is defensive ineptness with Branham, Sochan, Johnson, and Collins.

I'm not a fan of his game (tunnel vision/selfish), but he's clearly an All-NBA caliber player, entering his prime and about as good a fit in terms of game and personality as could be expected.

They're better defensively than offensively and the gap is widening since Wembanyama started playing C.

[exstatic]

The Nets aren't going to give up on Bridges. They will build around him. He is their SGA-lite. Sean Marks is much too smart to give up on a two way player like that. They will try to use their other role players - Johnson, Finney-Smith, Cam Thomas, Dinwiddie, O'Neale etc to get their draft picks.

They may not want to trade him, but he’s not a player that you can build around. He’s not a #1 guy.

[Seventyniner]

imo the Nets just might prefer the #1 or #2 pick (plus other assets) to Mikal if the price is right. It all depends on the timeline they're trying to build on.

[onechance87]

matas with another terrible game against austin spurs....Hard pass on him....not lottery player

[mo7888]

matas with another terrible game against austin spurs....Hard pass on him....not lottery player

He's been a little up and down coming off his injury. He's going to be a high pick in this draft.

[CGD]

He's been a little up and down coming off his injury. He's going to be a high pick in this draft.

I think he’ll be there at 7-8 which is where we hope the raptors pick lands. Would be interesting to see if Spurs pass on him.

[mo7888]

I think he’ll be there at 7-8 which is where we hope the raptors pick lands. Would be interesting to see if Spurs pass on him.

Yup... it can go alot of ways depending on who we draft with our pick and if we trade for a player. I like him, but I need to see more ..

[Mr. Body]

Such a terrible idea to go Ignite for him. What a waste of a year. He can't shoot so I figure the Spurs will draft him.

[mo7888]

Such a terrible idea to go Ignite for him. What a waste of a year. He can't shoot so I figure the Spurs will draft him.

He shot 43% from 3 and 80% from the FT line in high school. He'll be fine from a ahooting perspective. As far as Ignite goes, it won't help him develop(they are trash in that department) , but it probably won't affect his stock..

[Ditty]

I rather have Topic or Williams if we get a top 3 pick than Bridges.

[onechance87]

I rather have Topic or Williams if we get a top 3 pick than Bridges.

williams is probably the safe choice to help this team asap

[BackHome]

Yeah, I saw that Tankathon new mock has us getting both I definitely could live with that.

[mo7888]

Yeah, I saw that Tankathon new mock has us getting both I definitely could live with that.

It also has us taking Reed Shephard if we fall to pick #4. I thought that was interesting and pretty high for him. His shot is almost picture perfect though. Still, he'd need to be a PG to be taken there....maybe he is.... his handles looked good at the end of the Florida game yesterday

[CGD]

Such a terrible idea to go Ignite for him. What a waste of a year. He can't shoot so I figure the Spurs will draft him.

I do think there will be a “market correct” on players going the Ignite path if the first wave highly drafted players like Kuminga and Green don’t get PAID at their next contract. It’s looking a little sketch so far.

[Mr. Body]

Especially if the TOR pick conveys, the Spurs should have a good several SF prospects to pick from - if they want to. Unfortunately none of them seem to be good defenders in that range. (I wouldn't include Dunn there.)

[Chinook]

Honestly feel like too many people are sleeping on Collier. The Spurs keep going for "intangibles" and for whatever reason that's not really working out for them. Collier's talent feels rare in comparison to the other PG's people talk about. Get him and Sheppard. Spend money/picks to bring in a big wing who can fight with Sochan for the starting PF job or play next to him if Jeremy improves. Best I can see on the market right now would be Kyle Anderson. Then get a real center to back Wemby up.

Collier, Jones, Wesley
Sheppard, Champangie
Vassell, Johnson, Cissoko
Anderson, Sochan
Wembanayma, Collins, (Real Center)

I'd prefer to trade for that PF rather than have this lineup, but I don't see any good candidates at the moment. That seems like a pretty flexible rotation that can play big or small in multiple ways. But I do think the defensive performance of the starters would be pretty good, and that's a solid bench. It's also nice that there are a number of tradeable contracts still on the team if a more immediate route toward help shows up later in the season. The team can also accommodate the multiple firsts the team will have in 2025. Obviously the trade isn't dependent on two players. There are other combinations that would be good. But it would be nice for the Spurs to go for legit talent, assuming there are no KPJ-level red flags. The feel of the team would be different if they had a Shadeon Sharpe guard on the roster right now. It's a bit of a blessing for them that the guy a lot of teams were probably projecting to headline the draft is getting rated closer to the Toronto pick nowadays.

[exstatic]

Honestly feel like too many people are sleeping on Collier. The Spurs keep going for "intangibles" and for whatever reason that's not really working out for them. Collier's talent feels rare in comparison to the other PG's people talk about. Get him and Sheppard. Spend money/picks to bring in a big wing who can fight with Sochan for the starting PF job or play next to him if Jeremy improves. Best I can see on the market right now would be Kyle Anderson. Then get a real center to back Wemby up.

Collier, Jones, Wesley
Sheppard, Champangie
Vassell, Johnson, Cissoko
Anderson, Sochan
Wembanayma, Collins, (Real Center)

I'd prefer to trade for that PF rather than have this lineup, but I don't see any good candidates at the moment. That seems like a pretty flexible rotation that can play big or small in multiple ways. But I do think the defensive performance of the starters would be pretty good, and that's a solid bench. It's also nice that there are a number of tradeable contracts still on the team if a more immediate route toward help shows up later in the season. The team can also accommodate the multiple firsts the team will have in 2025. Obviously the trade isn't dependent on two players. There are other combinations that would be good. But it would be nice for the Spurs to go for legit talent, assuming there are no KPJ-level red flags. The feel of the team would be different if they had a Shadeon Sharpe guard on the roster right now. It's a bit of a blessing for them that the guy a lot of teams were probably projecting to headline the draft is getting rated closer to the Toronto pick nowadays.

I’d be mildly interested if he were 6’6”, but he’s PG sized with terrible passing skills.

[Dejounte]

Of all the “rearrangements” the Spurs have had in the rotation so far, Devin has barely spent any time playing the small forward position:

https://www.basketball-reference.com...1/lineups/2024

I don’t believe they have any plans moving him up to SF. It makes sense— he’s neither big enough or strong enough.

[R. DeMurre]

Just like it's worked so well for the Grizzlies, Cavaliers and Timberwolves, who have won a combined 0 playoff series with it. Yes, it's a relatively small sample size, injuries, youth and other weaknesses played a part, but the common denominator is none could score despite having All-NBA and All-Star caliber guards.

Even as agile and skilled as Wembanyama is, we saw those advantages mitigated when playing next to another C. That's what happens when you play two together, you get diminishing returns.



Nah, Mitc is.

The historical championship success of teams with an undersized starting SG is probably worse than any other positional size scenario. The last time a team won a le with a Mitc -sized SG was the Pistons in 1990-- 33 years ago-- and that was with Joe Dumars, who Jordan called the best defender in the league. The odds are very much against any Donovan Mitc team ever winning an NBA le.

[Mr. Body]

Most everyone is saying Collier is more like 6'3" than 6'5". I don't think players can dodge measurements this year. He's just a wreck. The things he's supposedly good at, he's terrible at. Of course there's more game to be played and of course all these guys are works in progress - we have to project ahead but it's looking gnarly.

[TD 21]

The historical championship success of teams with an undersized starting SG is probably worse than any other positional size scenario. The last time a team won a le with a Mitc -sized SG was the Pistons in 1990-- 33 years ago-- and that was with Joe Dumars, who Jordan called the best defender in the league. The odds are very much against any Donovan Mitc team ever winning an NBA le.

Except I'd offer Johnson, Branham + significant draft capital and play Mitc at PG.

His two biggest issues are that he's always been paired with another small guard and he's always had to be the best player (Gobert was higher impact for much of their time together, but obviously limited offensively), two things that will never lead to a championship.

Both wouldn't be an issue here, either immediately or in short order.