Reply With Quote
That's the most important part to me. Consistently fielding contenders without being willing to ever pay the tax is a nonstarter.
Nah, it'll hurt Ron Harper's feelings.
That's the most important part to me. Consistently fielding contenders without being willing to ever pay the tax is a nonstarter.
and somehow you still think nobody can call them this time and make an offer that changes their mind...
depends on who you draft. I think an Essengue could become an All-Star, but he's only 18 and won't be an All-Star when he's 21.
Because my point is that guys like Durant aren't aberrations. Yes, Durant himself is superlative due to talent, but the need to be able to add the Durants of the world will never go away. The team shouldn't build around the idea that they'll have the same star trio for many years. Maybe in three years, both Castle and Fox are gone, and the Spurs' core is Wemby, Harper and Siakam. Then four years later, and it's Wemby, Tatum and some new PG and wing phenoms they drafted in 2030 and 2031.
That's how you build for long-term success, by being flexible rather than rigidly selecting a core and making more and more compromises as that core becomes more expensive. Durant would just be the first step in that process, but he'd set the standard for future iterations. The Spurs should never turn away from building through the draft, but their money should be going toward what the players who currently have the production rather than players you hope will have the production in five years.
I can make the same argument for the other path:
The Spurs will never have that much leverage again. This is the first offseason where half the league will be on the move, including superstars. Teams will try to avoid apron penalties, offload contracts, etc. Tanking teams are desperately trying to get a franchise player, because the lottery odds are evened out and there's no guarantee they will land in the top 4.
With the Spurs having the #2 pick and a supposed franchise altering PG on the table, they can use that leverage to start a bidding war right now, so they can squeeze a large amount of future assets and players out of teams. Instead of waiting for 4 years and shopping Harper around as a sixth man with a questionable jumphsot, they should sell high.
now you just straight up trolling.
Man I remember when he was in college and thinking he'd be a stud in the NBA. He would be but he's injured too often and besides that, the worst thing of all, he's a lazy who puts up crazy numbers when he does play only to gaslight the Pelicans into more "hope" from Zion and "who he could become". That franchise is doomed!
It gets mentioned on here all the time how people envy the position OKC is in with their stockpile of future picks and flexibility. The idea of building a long runway, being able to pivot, and having multiple paths to success is always praised when it is someone else doing it.
Now that there is a realistic chance for the Spurs to do something similar by turning one high-value pick into multiple picks, a proven starter like Claxton, and future flexibility, suddenly it is seen as some kind of overthinking or mistake. This might be the only real opportunity the Spurs have in the near future to load up on future assets like that without blowing up the roster.
It is strange to celebrate what OKC has done while being completely against the Spurs doing the one thing that could actually get them closer to that position.
Because there's a certain value threshold that shouldn't be crossed.
We traded away #8, which was fine. We can also trade #14, would also be fine. We can for example give Hawks their pick or swap back in exchange for multiple assets, would also be fine.
But you don't trade away #2 when such a good prospect is available just to stock up on more picks.
If we had #3 or if Harper wasn't in this class and our choices were VJ, Ace or Johnson, then fine.
Harper is too good of a prospect not to pick.
When has OKC traded out of a top 3 pick who was almost universally considered an all-NBA caliber prospect…?
OKC is in the position they’re in right now largely in part to absolutely robbing the Clippers and getting a massive haul for Paul George which included SGA and several picks.
No one would be envying OKC if they didn’t have SGA and traded away Chet for more future FRPs
The thing is, if he were in that kind of shape and mindset, he wouldn't be on the trade block. I think he's too into his women/side pieces as distractions, eating and stuff other than Basketball. Maybe he turns it around, but IMO, if he's on the block, he's on the block for a reason and NO would probably be happy to trade him for a haul if they can get one.
It's a pity, right, especially with his skillset coming out of college. I guess the saying is true, "Hard work beats talent."
Bravo! Great post!!When has OKC traded out of a top 3 pick who was almost universally considered an all-NBA caliber prospect…?
OKC is in the position they’re in right now largely in part to absolutely robbing the Clippers and getting a massive haul for Paul George which included SGA and several picks.
No one would be envying OKC if they didn’t have SGA and traded away Chet for more future FRPs
Just like you mentioned, I really thought he was going to be a monster coming out of college. The main thing I was worried about was the weight on his knees/frame with the power he had, but turns out, that weight wasn't that big of a deal compared to some of the numbers he's gotten to on the scale the past couple of years. I also didn't expect any of the other stuff either. Really is a shame that he's pissing it away. I don't even like to think about it or him at all because I'd kill for half his talent and athleticism.
Any one of us would. It sucks to watch such a talent who would take it for granted. Oh what could have been...
yep. there isnt really a scenario where you move 2 just because you dont want to be "stuck with harper"
what if Fox gets hurt. what if Castle's value has already peaked and he never becomes particularly efficient. then you absolutely want to have Harper there as another long term option with a high end oulook. what if castle ends up improving his shot and settles in as the 3. suddenly that logjam isnt there.
the "worst case" scenario of taking harper is that all of fox/castle/harper end up being good but you cant get full value out of each or any of them. in which case you can always just make the trade then. its not about min-maxing our immediate roster needs for the 24-25 season. you cant make a choice about the #2 overall selection purely for the upcoming season's immediate needs and fits
This is an argument we've been worrying about a lot recently: "What if Harper doesn't develop", and it applies to Castle and every future pick. The answer is the same: You trust the process and hope it doesn't happen, but if it does, you pivot. That's much easier to do when you aren't locking yourself into a single idea of what the team's "core" is going to be.
Also, folks like Castle and Harper becoming good rotation players but not stars is only a tragedy if you don't pay them accordingly. You don't max out a Harper who's not able to unseat Fox or Castle, but a) if he's a threat to get big offer sheets, he has trade value and b) that means the Spurs got years of quality sixth-man play for cheap, which given these are the Durant years we're talking about is really valuable. Often in these arguments of players having lesser value if traded later it gets lost that value is ultimately there to be used, not exchanged. Guys having less trade value after contributing to a winning team for years is completely fine. They aren't trying to get top dollar on every deal. They're trying to win games and rings.
Last edited by Chinook; 06-13-2025 at 12:01 PM.
offensively, a healthy zion is not that far off from Giannis. they play a mostly similar brand on that side. ball handling, face up, finishing with power and athleticism. giannis is just longer so he does it better. neither can shoot well, both are solid playmakers.
so many of the same "how can defenses possibly deal with a wemby/giannis pairing" thoughts would also apply to zion
but giannis also provides all-world defense whereas Zion... doesnt. and zion is somehow a meh rebounder despite his abilities. and then you bake in his injury history, and his apparent lack of real commitment to the game, and its not worth the #2 pick
What the Spurs think currently has no bearing on 4 years from now.
The plan would be to trade one of Fox / Castle / Harper in the summer of 2029.these are the accurate extension numbers of Wemby, Fox, Castle, Harper with the salary cap and luxury tax lines. 29/30 is obviously the critical year. This would work in theory, if you are willing to trade away Fox in 2029 which would be the plan for most people on this board, I assume.
Yeah how stupid would it have been if Jerry West thought I already have Eddie Jones, Nick Van Exel, and Cedric Ceballos, what do I need to draft Kobe Bryant for?
Not with news of Dylan Harper visiting the Spurs for multiple days this week
Agree. Just because you have Fox and Castle, it doesn’t mean you pass up on consensus #2 pick (and arguably as much or even more Alpha Dog than Flagg). The Spurs have always done good with their players (even if Uncle Dennis didn’t think so). They open a dialogue what will happen come contract time, and if it’s not agreeable , then they’ll find that player a better situation. It’s assuming too much that these players are only about the money. Kobe himself expressed jealousy for Tim Duncan to have played in one NBA team, and how it would’ve been ideal to play in such a stable organization. The Big 3 have always expressed their appreciation for having team continuity which allowed them to contend every year. It’s just silly to presume these players will not sign if not for max contract. Brunson showed it’s not all about the money. Have a little faith on people.
I think they’ll run that multiple guards and tweak what else they’d need in the draft and agency. But I have no doubt it would be Dylan to Spurs at #2
You don't have to go all the way back to Portland passing on MJ on account of having Drexler, the arguably most important player in these playoffs (Tyrese Haliburton) was moved by his former team (Sacramento) because they already had Fox and weren't willing to wait and collect more data, they rushed it and not only did they move the better of the 2, but also the one they kept (Fox) asked out, they got pennies on the dollar for him, and neither Fox nor Haliburton are on their roster and thy find themselves hoping they can land someone anywhere near as good as them. So yeah, trading a player you think is the best talent available because you (cir stantially) already have that spot covered (which may not even be the case) doesn't sound like a wise strategy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
