There is Markannen to Spurs Buzz

[Wilt Chamberlain]

Damn sure was

Reed was “no” risk (in context) since he was a rookie deal and a draft pick where we didnt give up a bunch of other picks to get him and player(s) on top of having to immediately pay him 40M+

I like Lauri as a fit - I do not like paying super all star prices for a guy who will have his role reduced on SA due to his skillset alongside punting the opportunity costs of getting to draft and/or trade for guys who may have better skillsets and upside alongside Wemby etc..

He is an all star. There are more teams than all stars but not many. If you figure each team can fit at least 2 max level players at least you would be paying max money to two all stars once Wemby comes up.

KJ and Collins are eating up $35M AAV. Getting them off the books would allow yet another significant player or two even after LM is brought in.

[RC_Drunkford]

MPJ is a good example of why selling the farm for Markannen would be a terrible idea.

MPJ is on an awful cap killing contract. If he wasn't on a contender then sure, maybe he'd put up bigger stats like Markannen. And as it is, he puts up fine numbers, 16-18 points a game on 40% from 3 or so these past 2 years with 6-7 rebounds.

But he's expendable and they could have spent their money better. Ultimately it's just overspending for three point shooting and spacing.

Money should be for Wemby and whoever is the on ball creator. Make everyone fit around that that. And no matter what moves they make this summer, there has to be enough money to pay for that non-wemby creator or enough assets to get him, via draft or trade, and Markannen ain't that guy.

Another example would be Towns. While he's become a great shooter at his size, he can't be counted on to generate for himself and is the most restrictive contract they have. the Wolves media guys I listen to were thrilled with Dillingham because they needed someone else to create and Towns couldn't. So a 160 pound rookie will have to carry the weight of all their dreams.

People might argue, pay Markkannen now and figure the other stuff later. Everyone's paying big, look at Boston! But No way the Holts and their minority partners are ever going to pay the kind of money that Boston has committed to, so much their owner is bowing out. They'll be 2nd apron with just the starters in a couple of years.

If a tall shooter is what the Spurs need, they could probably get Towns off the Minnesota books for a lot less next summer, same with Porter. Don't need to burn so much on Ainge's guy.

You do realize Jokic and Murray are on a max also, while we got Wemby on a rookie deal and Vassell making half of that?

[lefty]

Lauri is not going anywhere

Ainge has drafted well so they will hsve the right pieces to go along with Markannen

[objective]

You do realize Jokic and Murray are on a max also, while we got Wemby on a rookie deal and Vassell making half of that?

Of course, and MPJ is killing their team, couldn't even keep kcp.

Spurs need a Murray, hopefully someone better, they'll be needing the max if they're not on a rookie deal

If there's a trade for Markannen and the plan is to use bird rights, that's 4 more years after 1 where the money will be big. That bleeds over into the Wemby extension, and in time they'll combine for what, $100 million a year?

Good long term financial planning has to be done now. Spurs traded away Scola to get off of 2.5 million of Butler money, Denver lost KCP and burned all their future draft assets getting off money (3 2nds to get off $5 million of Reggie Jackson? Ouch!) or desperately trying to find cheap players. Spurs will be in the same boat if they're not careful

[RC_Drunkford]

Of course, and MPJ is killing their team, couldn't even keep kcp.

Spurs need a Murray, hopefully someone better, they'll be needing the max if they're not on a rookie deal

If there's a trade for Markannen and the plan is to use bird rights, that's 4 more years after 1 where the money will be big. That bleeds over into the Wemby extension, and in time they'll combine for what, $100 million a year?

Good long term financial planning has to be done now. Spurs traded away Scola to get off of 2.5 million of Butler money, Denver lost KCP and burned all their future draft assets getting off money (3 2nds to get off $5 million of Reggie Jackson? Ouch!) or desperately trying to find cheap players. Spurs will be in the same boat if they're not careful

Wemby's extension will kick in in 2027. If there's a Markkanen trade now you renegotiate his contract and then frontload it. Even if you don't and give him the full max, you have 3 seasons of Markkanen with enough cap space to sign another FA. Then you'd have 2 years left where Wemby gets paid too, but Vassell will still earn 50% of what is a max right now. By 2027 the cap will be about 180 million. See how that works? This is exactly the way to maximize cap space without risking getting to apron territory which is what a lot of y'all fail to understand.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Reasonable price? Get him. Overpay just to improve some? No. Im out.

Ultimately, this is the only real argument for most people here (bar a couple of lunatics). Everything else - whether he'd stay, whether he's a legit 2nd option, etc. - is irrelevant.

We can safely assume Lauri's price would fall somewhere between Siakam's and Bridges's. The arguments are many because of the fact the Spurs own so many, and diverse, picks to offer.

I, for one, would be happy to pay somewhere in the middle of that spectrum and would get queasy if it goes towards the higher end, but I believe Lauri would be great on the current Spurs and the type of player who'd be an easy fit for any team, so he would be tradable even if he disappoints. It wouldn't be a disastrous trade that would set the franchise back and it would also leave enough assets for another big trade. Downsides are fewer, imo.

[tbdog]

Lauri is not going anywhere

Ainge has drafted well so they will hsve the right pieces to go along with Markannen

Lauri fits essentially every team in the NBA. He will improve every team. He is kinda like Bridges or Paul George. You don't have to change your play book. He just slids right in.

[objective]

Wemby's extension will kick in in 2027. If there's a Markkanen trade now you renegotiate his contract and then frontload it. Even if you don't and give him the full max, you have 3 seasons of Markkanen with enough cap space to sign another FA. Then you'd have 2 years left where Wemby gets paid too, but Vassell will still earn 50% of what is a max right now. By 2027 the cap will be about 180 million. See how that works? This is exactly the way to maximize cap space without risking getting to apron territory which is what a lot of y'all fail to understand.

Ahh, but if the price to acquire is too high, it short circuits adding a better player.

Markkannen on the team next year probably guarantees the playoffs from here out, no lotto picks there.

If the cost to acquire him is the better picks of other teams, no lotto picks there.

Max deal for Markannen, which is a fair expectation, no cap space for a max deal free agent. Not enough attractive assets to trade for a superstar

It's a tightrope to walk. Not just in acquiring new talent but in keeping it. Denver lost their starting SG on a very matchable deal, but they were just too cheap. But compared to the Spurs, they might as well be Balmer. They paid more tax in 23-24 than the Spurs have spent in franchise history combined by about $ 3 million.

If the asset cost is low, fine. If the monetary cost is low relative to the max, fine. Even better if Markkannen waits the year and signs outright

[RC_Drunkford]

Ahh, but if the price to acquire is too high, it short circuits adding a better player.

Markkannen on the team next year probably guarantees the playoffs from here out, no lotto picks there.

If the cost to acquire him is the better picks of other teams, no lotto picks there.

Max deal for Markannen, which is a fair expectation, no cap space for a max deal free agent. Not enough attractive assets to trade for a superstar

It's a tightrope to walk. Not just in acquiring new talent but in keeping it. Denver lost their starting SG on a very matchable deal, but they were just too cheap. But compared to the Spurs, they might as well be Balmer. They paid more tax in 23-24 than the Spurs have spent in franchise history combined by about $ 3 million.

If the asset cost is low, fine. If the monetary cost is low relative to the max, fine. Even better if Markkannen waits the year and signs outright

I didn't know people on this message board were that slow. Have you actually ever looked at our cap sheet and the 2025 free agent class? Please tell me where in 2025 is a max free agent available? I'd like to know that one. The only good player available will be Naz Reid. Spurs cap next season is 77 million and that's with Zach Collins and Keldon Johnson who are worth another 35 million. The cap will be 150 million. Are you that bad at math?

And again, why do you want lottery picks? Do you want to draft your entire 15 man roster? We have 8 draft picks on the team right now, 4 of them top 10 and likely 1 or 2 more in the next draft. Y'all really want to contend in 2030 it seems.

[rankingtear]

Ahh, but if the price to acquire is too high, it short circuits adding a better player.

Markkannen on the team next year probably guarantees the playoffs from here out, no lotto picks there.

If the cost to acquire him is the better picks of other teams, no lotto picks there.

Max deal for Markannen, which is a fair expectation, no cap space for a max deal free agent. Not enough attractive assets to trade for a superstar

It's a tightrope to walk. Not just in acquiring new talent but in keeping it. Denver lost their starting SG on a very matchable deal, but they were just too cheap. But compared to the Spurs, they might as well be Balmer. They paid more tax in 23-24 than the Spurs have spent in franchise history combined by about $ 3 million.

If the asset cost is low, fine. If the monetary cost is low relative to the max, fine. Even better if Markkannen waits the year and signs outright

You can renegotiate and cut 22 million. Then a flat deal like Devin then you got a fun max contract after the first year of the extension. As long as they are still no news about any other signing they are holding that capspace for Lauri.

[objective]

I didn't know people on this message board were that slow. Have you actually ever looked at our cap sheet and the 2025 free agent class? Please tell me where in 2025 is a max free agent available? I'd like to know that one. The only good player available will be Naz Reid. Spurs cap next season is 77 million and that's with Zach Collins and Keldon Johnson who are worth another 35 million. The cap will be 150 million. Are you that bad at math?

And again, why do you want lottery picks? Do you want to draft your entire 15 man roster? We have 8 draft picks on the team right now, 4 of them top 10 and likely 1 or 2 more in the next draft. Y'all really want to contend in 2030 it seems.

The math is why I've posted like I have. The math has to work not just for one year or 2.years before Wemby gets a supermax, it has to work his entire career wthin the constraints of ownership. Markkannen is like a Dejounte, a modest all star. He's probably not enough to win the le solely by his addition, so the cost must be measured carefully.

My quick math was if they trade Keldon for Markkannen to get his cap hold and pay dearly in assets, they wouldn't have the space to absorb a max player at the max or sign anyone to the max. Do the math for every season and it becomes a tightrope through Wemby's supermax.

Naz Reid is a good idea for a player who can have a similar impact on winning with a cheaper cost, as he showed this year to the point where Finch was telling Towns to play like Reid after his injury.

[LeBowen]

Markkannen is like a Dejounte, a modest all star.

I disagree, but even if we take that he was, you have to realize Dejounte's contract is a big underpay considering the extensions handed out these days.
Rookie extensions are in the range of 200/5, the cap is about to blow up.





For 25-26 season we can easily go down to $65M total salaries if we get rid of Zach, Keldon, Malaki, Wesley, Sidy and Bassey. I think it's fair to say none of them have a long-term future here.
That's $90M under the cap.

Even if we go with the route of keeping both '25 picks, those two rookies probably won't cost more than $15M combined, since they won't be in top5.
That's even if we draft both, which isn't that realistic, if trade options and this draft are any indication of PATFO's future plans.
Anyhow, that's still $75M under the cap.

Wemby, Devin, Jeremy, Castle, Champagnie and two rookies on the roster.
If we get a max player, doesn't have to be Markkanen, that would be around $30M left on the cap.
Then you either offer Tre a new deal or get another veteran similar to CP3 to rotate with Castle at point. Maybe even keep CP3 for one more year, who knows.
Let's say $15M left for the sake of Tre's raise. Maybe a 30/2 contract.

Castle/Tre
Devin/rookie
rookie/Champagnie
Markkanen/Jeremy
Wemby/?

We'd have about $15M to get a veteran backup for Wemby.
Or maybe we kept Zach (please no). Or we kept Keldon and drafted a rookie big. However you want it.
Maybe Ingram or another cheap player pops up to fill the rotation.

And the cap keeps growing every year.

Naz Reid is a good idea for a player who can have a similar impact on winning with a cheaper cost, as he showed this year to the point where Finch was telling Towns to play like Reid after his injury.

I also love Naz, but if we're to nitpick, I'd argue that he's a worse defender than Lauri.
He's not an all-star, but he'll surely ask for around $30M a year.

[Mikesatx]

FWIW I started playing fantasy basketball two seasons ago. I traded for Laurie in the first season and drafted him in the second. At different points I also had Kessler & Clarkson. Because of this I watched more Jazz basketball than I ever would have otherwise. Here are my observations.

Laurie is an absolute beast on the court. He is not a one trick pony and his defense his much better than what many in the thread are giving him credit for.

The Jazz were way overachieving two seasons ago primarily because Laurie came in and developed into a lot more than he was prior to getting there. Kessler was also a surprised. Utah traded Conley, Beasley and Alexander that February. Last year they traded Olynyk and Agbaji.

the talk about his durability had more to do with shutting him down versus being chronically injured.

i also had Bridges on my fantasy team last year so watched a fair amount of Nets games. Bridges is not at the same level as Laurie, not even close. Someone suggested Cam Johnson. In the games I watched he never did anything memorable and was probably the 4th option on a crap team.

He is worth pushing the chips in on. I can’t think of any other players that are gettable that I would say the same about.

[SpursBills]

I have my misgivings about the contract that Markannen's going to be given and his durability, but I'm confused why people think that he's going to come in and his usage his going to drop way down.

He had a TS% of 63% last two years in Utah being an offensive focal point, and it's not like he was pounding the ball into the ground for his possessions

For reference:
Devin Vassell - 57%
Wembanyama - 57%
Devin Booker - 61%
Steph Curry 67% peak, 61% last year

If a guy shows that he can be an efficient offensive player on high usage, why would you decrease his usage? If he comes over, I'm shunting usage (not time of possession) to him to try and drive a more efficient offense and waiting to see if Wemby and Vassell can catch up / develop. If he's a first option driving efficient offense rather than the 3rd option that some are anticipating, that's way more worthy of giving up draft capital.

[exstatic]

MPJ is a good example of why selling the farm for Markannen would be a terrible idea.

MPJ is on an awful cap killing contract. If he wasn't on a contender then sure, maybe he'd put up bigger stats like Markannen. And as it is, he puts up fine numbers, 16-18 points a game on 40% from 3 or so these past 2 years with 6-7 rebounds.

But he's expendable and they could have spent their money better. Ultimately it's just overspending for three point shooting and spacing.

Money should be for Wemby and whoever is the on ball creator. Make everyone fit around that that. And no matter what moves they make this summer, there has to be enough money to pay for that non-wemby creator or enough assets to get him, via draft or trade, and Markannen ain't that guy.

Another example would be Towns. While he's become a great shooter at his size, he can't be counted on to generate for himself and is the most restrictive contract they have. the Wolves media guys I listen to were thrilled with Dillingham because they needed someone else to create and Towns couldn't. So a 160 pound rookie will have to carry the weight of all their dreams.

People might argue, pay Markkannen now and figure the other stuff later. Everyone's paying big, look at Boston! But No way the Holts and their minority partners are ever going to pay the kind of money that Boston has committed to, so much their owner is bowing out. They'll be 2nd apron with just the starters in a couple of years.

If a tall shooter is what the Spurs need, they could probably get Towns off the Minnesota books for a lot less next summer, same with Porter. Don't need to burn so much on Ainge's guy.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen MPJ put the ball on the floor, or score at the rim. Just because they’re both tall (Lauri is taller) and can shoot doesn’t make them the same.

[R. DeMurre]

One more comp featuring Lauri's game: when he became the first player in history to finish a season with 200 3s and 100 dunks, he ended with 111 dunks. That's the same number of dunks that LeBron had the year Cleveland won the le, but LeBron played 400 more minutes. Klay Thompson, over 11 seasons, has a total of 132 dunks. The notion that Markkanen is nothing but a three point guy is simply not true. The highest number of dunks Dirk ever had in a single season was 48. In the '03 season when Duncan was league MVP and finals MVP, he finished the year with exactly 111 dunks. By any standard, Lauri is elite at getting to the rim.

[Sugus]

It comes down to this...do you actually trust this team that purports to be a team that gets better through the draft to actually get better through the draft? How much real trust do you have in them? I personally don't really trust them. Make the trade.

I ask you the same thing, then: what is the problem with Castle as a draft pick? Was he not the best player and best fit for the team when taken? Because the Dillingham pick/trade has nothing to do with the team's ability to get better through the draft.

But I do agree with your overall point that everyone's sitting pretty solidly on their side of the fence.

[LeBowen]

I ask you the same thing, then: what is the problem with Castle as a draft pick? Was he not the best player and best fit for the team when taken?

Castle was probably a tier1 player on everyone's board.
Since we weren't after big men, other tier1 players already got picked and for us it was either Castle or another random swing.
I already said Castle was my preferred player at #4 and I'm happy we got him, but I'm not sure PATFO would've picked him over Risacher or Sheppard if they were on the board.

Because the Dillingham pick/trade has nothing to do with the team's ability to get better through the draft.

It actually does.
How many times have we seen a team in desperate need of talent trade a top10 pick away? Without getting an actual player in return, but future picks?
At least a couple of players that were available at #8 will become legit starters for playoff teams. Maybe they won't be all-stars, but there are some good future NBA players in there.
But PATFO wasn't sure who's it going to be and traded the pick away instead of making a risk.

Fine, I also get that side of the argument. But why would I be optimistic they'll be competent enough to hit with a few more late lottery picks down the road? Or picks outside the lottery?
Jeremy, Primo, Devin with three mid to late lottery picks isn't a good record, if you ask me.

But I do agree with your overall point that everyone's sitting pretty solidly on their side of the fence.

And I like it. That's what forums are for...as long as people have valid arguments.

For example, my take is that most anti-Markkenen people in here don't follow the league closely enough to realize how hard it is to get an all-star wing these days and that two good FRPs and two average ones isn't that high of a price if your entire roster is young and you actually believe in them.
Also, I don't think realize how few actual lottery picks we have in our stash.

If Trae stays, odds of getting a top10 pick from Atlanta are very low. If he leaves, it probably doesn't happen for two more seasons meaning only '27 pick could be good.
But even then, they overestimate the quality of that pick because a team with no pick has no incentive to tank. That's +10 wins right away. Every year there are at least 5 times tanking on purpose and then like 5 more than decide to pull the handbrake and they tank in the final few months.

The only way to get a top5 pick from another team is dumb luck, like what happened with Rockets this year.
To overvalue a pick because you believe in dumb luck is just bad strategy from my perspective. We got all the lottery luck we needed.

To put things into perspective, Nets had the 9th best odds in lottery. 20% odds to land a top4 pick. Can't be in 5-8th range. Just 1-4th and 9-1th.
Any team that wants to win easily gets 30 wins.
Do you value 20% chance to land a top4 pick and like 20% chance of that pick being better than Markkanen more than getting the actual all-star about to enter his prime?
That's 4% jackpot for you. With two or three tickets, one each year.

Also, Markkanen needing an extension right away isn't that bad. If we give him a raise and extension right away, it would be a good value deal considering the cap projections.
What we don't want is to have all-stars who'll be up for extension in the same year (+/-1) as Wemby. That's how you get into luxury right away.

[RC_Drunkford]

The math is why I've posted like I have. The math has to work not just for one year or 2.years before Wemby gets a supermax, it has to work his entire career wthin the constraints of ownership. Markkannen is like a Dejounte, a modest all star. He's probably not enough to win the le solely by his addition, so the cost must be measured carefully.

My quick math was if they trade Keldon for Markkannen to get his cap hold and pay dearly in assets, they wouldn't have the space to absorb a max player at the max or sign anyone to the max. Do the math for every season and it becomes a tightrope through Wemby's supermax.

Naz Reid is a good idea for a player who can have a similar impact on winning with a cheaper cost, as he showed this year to the point where Finch was telling Towns to play like Reid after his injury.

you just prove that you haven‘t read anything or looked up the cap. A Markkanen deal would be for 5 years, after that you obviously pivot and let him go or resign him cheaper since he’d be 32 by then. We‘re not giving out 15 year deals for players next to Wemby and I clearly showed you that you can still add other pieces. We have plenty of contracts on our roster that expire when Wemby is due for his contract.

[Mugen]

Do the spurs need a self creating starting PF next to wemby, Vassell, castle (or insert eventual point guard of the future)

at some point it becomes worth adding a 7 foot MPJ type. I just wish Lauri had more consistent defense.

Unfortunately Saluan was picked at #6 tbh

[Mr. Body]

Markkannen is like a Dejounte, a modest all star.

What I've been saying. Dejounte scored nearly a triple doub per the season he got All-Star, then when he had to share the floor with better players on a playoff-aspiring team, his production went down, until he was traded this year for a couple pieces and couple picks.

That's Lauri Markkanen. Both players were reserves on the All-Star team for good years that hid the fact that they were only very good player. Nice to have players. Not break the bank players.

He's a player you get for what he's worth - a player or two plus a couple of picks. But when you add in the rest - the fact that he sits out so many games a year, is a play finisher rather than passer or creator, or even much of a connector - the appeal starts draining piece by piece. Finally, as you say, when you're looking at a max for this player, that's just not a good idea.

Again, the reason why we're seeing a very slow market for him. Even if Ainge brings the costs to acquire down from absurdity. He's nice but super problematic at that price.

[Mr. Body]

Do the spurs need a self creating starting PF next to wemby, Vassell, castle (or insert eventual point guard of the future)

at some point it becomes worth adding a 7 foot MPJ type. I just wish Lauri had more consistent defense.

And as I've been saying, he barely plays like a 7 footer. His rebounding is pretty good, but doesn't block shots, no defensive presence.

[Splits]

Fortunately bust Saluan was picked at #6 tbh

fixed

[CitizenDwayne]

What I've been saying. Dejounte scored nearly a triple doub per the season he got All-Star, then when he had to share the floor with better players on a playoff-aspiring team, his production went down, until he was traded this year for a couple pieces and couple picks.

That's Lauri Markkanen. Both players were reserves on the All-Star team for good years that hid the fact that they were only very good player. Nice to have players. Not break the bank players.

He's a player you get for what he's worth - a player or two plus a couple of picks. But when you add in the rest - the fact that he sits out so many games a year, is a play finisher rather than passer or creator, or even much of a connector - the appeal starts draining piece by piece. Finally, as you say, when you're looking at a max for this player, that's just not a good idea.

Again, the reason why we're seeing a very slow market for him. Even if Ainge brings the costs to acquire down from absurdity. He's nice but super problematic at that price.

But the alternative isn’t another, more consistent all star level guy

The alternative is starting Julian Champagnie

Looking at it with that in mind renders a lot of your nitpicks moot

[Ariel]

If Trae stays, odds of getting a top10 pick from Atlanta are very low. If he leaves, it probably doesn't happen for two more seasons meaning only '27 pick could be good.
But even then, they overestimate the quality of that pick because a team with no pick has no incentive to tank. That's +10 wins right away. Every year there are at least 5 times tanking on purpose and then like 5 more than decide to pull the handbrake and they tank in the final few months.

The only way to get a top5 pick from another team is dumb luck, like what happened with Rockets this year.
To overvalue a pick because you believe in dumb luck is just bad strategy from my perspective. We got all the lottery luck we needed.

To put things into perspective, Nets had the 9th best odds in lottery. 20% odds to land a top4 pick. Can't be in 5-8th range. Just 1-4th and 9-1th.
Any team that wants to win easily gets 30 wins.
Do you value 20% chance to land a top4 pick and like 20% chance of that pick being better than Markkanen more than getting the actual all-star about to enter his prime?
That's 4% jackpot for you. With two or three tickets, one each year.

Lets assume Spurs and Atlanta go into the season without any significant moves. Where would you reasonably have them finish the season, worst to best? As in, pre-lottery standings with 1 being worst in the league. Just trying to put actual numbers on this.