Reply With Quote
OKC traded for their star and nakedly tanked for their #2 and #3 guys. You want the Spurs to win 22 games again?
IF that’s the case I have no issue for it especially because I value Keldon as a late lottery pick in a good draft and a top 5-10 in a draft like we just saw. Sochan I love and I personally want on the team and believe in, but if you get Lauri, it does phase him out as starter (and I view him as a lottery pick in terms of compensation).
OKC traded for their star and nakedly tanked for their #2 and #3 guys. You want the Spurs to win 22 games again?
We traded for our star (Wemby via DJ+White+DeRozan deals) - its not different
I don’t think this is happening. Spurs probably called and were involved early. As soon as it became a bidding war Ainge probably set the price sky high to the point it probably doesn’t make sense for us anymore.
Also the “DPG only wants to win a deal” crowd is strawmanning so hard. I dont give a about “winning” a deal. Context matters here and I wont let you gaslight me otherwise
Im fine paying 1000000 million dollars and 29 firsts for the right guy. I dont think Lauri is that guy NOR do I think its the right time to take that swing (but especially for a player like him).
If it were Luka or Ant man? Cool. Pummel the spurs and do what it takes. This isnt that situation, he isnt that player and patience is warranted due to opportunity costs and risk/reward.
Good for Spurs. That is smart and aligns with what they’ve said and what they are signaling. Pivot to Cam or Simone Fontecchio and keep the guns loaded for 25’
You can only play five guys at once; that's why 4 quarters are never worth one dollar when it comes to NBA rosters. Cam Johnson is the kind of guy you get to plug holes in a contending roster, not another foundational piece to build around which is what the Spurs need to put next to Victor.
Opposite IMO. Spurs aren’t contending with Lauri so you dont pay insane prices for him. He’s not some missing piece you can justify over paying for because hes a great fit and puts you over the top.
Right now, Spurs need base hits to help with unlocking Wemby/Dev etc…and keeping all the main assets to get Wemby a legit running mate; not Lauri
his point is Lauri is good enough to be considered a foundational piece you can continue building around whereas cam Johnson is more of a “finishing touch” type player
But hes not is my point. Lauri is the type of guy you get as icing on the cake where you know you are overpaying but hes good enough to put a really good team missing a very specific thing over the top.
Now, again, if you can get him at a very reasonable price where you have all your best young players + best pristine draft picks to build around that fact? Sure you grab him and be happy.
Cam is a less expensive stop gap that fills a need to move team forward and make life easier with zero risk because he retains value that you can trade later to get the piece that is a legit part of the future.
You keep acting like trading for Markkanen is the risky path while using those assets in the draft instead doesn't carry major risk. I think you're dead wrong. Markannen you know you're getting something really nice. Those three Atlanta picks/swap could be around #10 if they don't dump Trae so it's not like the OKC model where they tanked and got Chet #2 to put next to SGA. The last three picks the Spurs made in that 10ish range were Sochan, Vassell, and Primo. One complete bust in Primo, one guy in Vassell who is pretty good offensively but no Markannen and only marginally better defensively than Lauri, and one guy Sochan who is a pretty bad player two years in but has some potential to grow into maybe being a defensive ace. Or he could bust; it could go either way with Jeremy. I'd rather have the bird in the hand and have this team start playing meaningful playoff games, and I have never even suggested giving up all three Atlanta picks/swap to get Markannen.
He also wouldnt trade for Luka if I remember correctly
Still worth it. Risk/Reward is you get lucky and get a top 4 pick and worst case is you get a Vassell. Lauri isnt so much better than Vassell that you punt a chance at better than Vassell for him. And that’s just the draft. If you keep all your 2025 picks and then decide you need a “Lauri” type, you still have all the capital you need to get a deal like that done. So the ONLY risk is overpaying for Lauri here; not the other way around.
You may not have suggested giving up all ATL picks, but collectively in terms of value so many here have argued giving up that level of picks for him. Thats what Im arguing.
Reasonable price? Get him. Overpay just to improve some? No. Im out.
You can say this all you want, but I read your posts manAlso the “DPG only wants to win a deal” crowd is strawmanning so hard. I dont give a about “winning” a deal. Context matters here and I wont let you gaslight me otherwise
Im fine paying 1000000 million dollars and 29 firsts for the right guy. I dont think Lauri is that guy NOR do I think its the right time to take that swing (but especially for a player like him).
If it were Luka or Ant man? Cool. Pummel the spurs and do what it takes. This isnt that situation, he isnt that player and patience is warranted due to opportunity costs and risk/reward.
It's easy to say that you're willing to give up everything for guys who aren't available and assets we don't have. I'd happy pay $1billion to own the White House. Never mind that I don't have a billion and the White House ain't for sale.
Every trade proposal you throw out is an underpay, and no one is ever good enough. Its as predictable as the sun rising. Its completely fine - I still otherwise enjoy your takes, but its who you are. I mean , you think Keldon is worth a lottery pick, but actual good players aren't worth their value. These aren't things we make up... these are things you write down.
Nah. You view it as an underpay because you’re horny and desperate. I view them, as do many, as completely rational and reasonable. You’re the type that goes into buying a home saying “I have a budget of X” but when you like a house a lot you get caught up in saying “I will go out to eat less and we have to out bid these people” even though its way beyond the budget you set going into itYou can say this all you want, but I read your posts man
It's easy to say that you're willing to give up everything for guys who aren't available and assets we don't have. I'd happy pay $1billion to own the White House. Never mind that I don't have a billion and the White House ain't for sale.
Every trade proposal you throw out is an underpay, and no one is ever good enough. Its as predictable as the sun rising. Its completely fine - I still otherwise enjoy your takes, but its who you are.
I love you though (being serious - I enjoy talking ball with you)
I said "X picks" because from the angle I was taking on the situation (cap space), it didn't matter if it was one pick or five picks. If it's closer to the latter, I could consider the extra salary to basically be a rounding error in the value exchange. What mattered was the net outgoing salary. If the Spurs could get whomever they want (DeRozan or another player) for $18 Million just as easily as they could for $21 Million, I guess it wouldn't really be a positive for them to include Graham. But they would be able to figure that out before the trade.
Or players they could flip. Keldon showed he wouldn't stop a tank, but I would assume he wouldn't be in the deal if the Jazz were apathetic or against it. Johnson has more value to the Spurs as a player than a trade piece. However, the hypothetical scenario I was responding to had Keldon and Sochan as the outgoing players in the Markkanen deal. That's why I included him. The Spurs have the ability to basically take Mark into cap space, so they don't actually need to trade any particular ballast like so many ideas in this thread include.
Throwing a pick away for ing Cam Johnson at this stage is dumber than giving up 6 picks for Lauri. A roster construction built around Wemby+Lauri+Dev gets you into the playoffs. A roster construction built around Wemby+Dev+Cam Johsnon gets you from 22 wins to 28 wins. We either need to commit to another year of tanking where we get a high pick, or we need to make the improvement worth it by getting to play-in/play-off range to get the experience.
And should a Wemby+Dev+Cam Johnson lineup construction actually prove to get you to that play-in/play-off range... then it's because Wemby and Dev have taken an even bigger leap than expected, in which case you'll have been better off having Lauri to take you even further. This isn't that complicated.
I don't think it's fair to say you're being objective. I think that's the easiest way to not notice your biases. Like for example, I'd say my view on Markkanen is way more complex now than it was a month ago. I've sort of grown to love and hate him. I have spent so much brain power worrying about him that I really want it to have meant something to the team's future. But at the same time, I'm so sick of thinking about Markkanen that I almost hope the Jazz trades him to Detroit so we can be done with it.Nah. You view it as an underpay because you’re horny and desperate. I view them, as do many, as completely rational and reasonable. You’re the type that goes into buying a home saying “I have a budget of X” but when you like a house a lot you get caught up in saying “I will go out to eat less and we have to out bid these people” even though its way beyond the budget you set going into it
I love you though (being serious - I enjoy talking ball with you)
No worst case is you get Primos and Sochans. Not so lucky, not so unlucky case you get a Vassell with one of the picks. Even if you get lucky and land a top 4 there's still plenty of chance you get a Derrick Williams or even worse a James Wiseman. Markannen you know what you're getting, and that's a guy probably good enough to be a #2 option on a good team. You can tank for draft position when you have nothing to lose, when your core is Keldon Johnson and Vassell and you're not going anywhere anyways; doesn't make sense to when you have the guy who has shown himself to be the best young player we have seen in 25-30 years. Moving assets for Markannen isn't rushing things. Moving them for someone like Kevin Durant would be since you'd have to win right now making that move, but Markannen will likely be in his prime for entire contract the Spurs would give him plus the year he'd be on his current deal. Your reasonable price can't be hey Ainge, bend over, because he can do better elsewhere.
At some point we're going have to reckon with the possibility that Sochan was a perfectly fine selection but that the coaching staff is horrible at developing talent. It sucks that he's losing this summer to international play after already losing last summer to the stupid PG thing. I think a competent staff would've had him working on his strengths, and he'd look about where you'd expect.
I highly disagree that giving up Keldon and/or Sochan + picks gets SA into the playoffs with Lauri. Who are spurs leaping - go ahead and game that out. Beyond that, even if SA was a play-in team and snuck in great. But what matters more to me is development and you can do that without Lauri IMO
As someone who has bought and sold a lot of houses - and created a lot of personal wealth from those transactions - I'm the opposite. I've never bought at the top of my budget and I've always gotten value that creates near instant equity. And that's the same approach here. I'm not focused on the price of Lauri, I'm focused on the value. And at the deal I've proposed (which is only a SA28 different from the deal you have proposed, which unless things are going very poorly, should be a pick in the mid 20s. I'm not going to let a Blake Wesley get in the way of closing the deal) in my mind creates the value.Nah. You view it as an underpay because you’re horny and desperate. I view them, as do many, as completely rational and reasonable. You’re the type that goes into buying a home saying “I have a budget of X” but when you like a house a lot you get caught up in saying “I will go out to eat less and we have to out bid these people” even though its way beyond the budget you set going into it
I love you though (being serious - I enjoy talking ball with you)
At the end of the day, it obviously is about the perceived value of the player. I see a highly efficient 7-footer who has routinely posted 50/40/90 seasons and averages 24pts and 8reb. It's not like those are flukes either, he's almost a career 50/40/90 guy, and he only got more efficient with increased volume. Are there durability concerns? Yes, but I feel comfortable with those based on how he's been shut down two years in a row to tank. Are there defensive questions? Yes, but I feel comfortable with those based on the rest of the roster construction.
But anyway, I'm not going to convince you otherwise and that is fine. Maybe we'll get lucky in the draft and get a guy who maybe can become a 50/40/90 guy on his own. We probably won't be getting a 7-foot wing who posts 50/40/90 - because those are pretty rare.
I look at a guy like Jabari Smith Jr, who went #3 and was talked about going #1 in a pretty strong class at the top of the draft... and his 99% offensive outcome is... Lauri Markkanen. I'll take the sure thing every time.
What’s not objective in your view? Have I ever said he sucks? Have I ever said theres no scenario or price where he’s worth it? , have I even never said theres no scenario where I see Spurs overpaying and offering Sochan + Keldon + multiple picks to get it done?
Bias to me is acting like theres no other way to think but your own; I never did that here. I simply have my opinion while fully acknowledging SA may view this entirely different than me and even proposing what I believe (even in Scotts words) to be deals that may get it done that I would STRONGLY dislike.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions