Be patient for one more season

[vy65]

Why are folks assuming I'm fine with trading away Dilly?

The point is that the comparison to those three other teams breaks down because they weren't trading out of top-10 picks when they were rebuilding/spooling up.

[z0sa]

Yeah, I'm not feeling the patience or arguments after a couple of nights sleeping on it. Team rebuilding should NEVER trade away an 8th pick for another POTENTIAL lottery pick 7 years out. One that could easily be late teens even if everyone but Ant leaves. It's stupid, it's trading for the sake of trading and having a warchest, only there's literally 0 indication it will ever be used and PATFO are saying it won't. So if you're not trading for a player using the lottery picks and you're not using the actual picks from the lottery picks, WTF are you doing???

We should definitely trade for someone like Butler who can lift this team and help us grow since PATFO/ownership don't think they're a team rebuilding, but one that's already won multiple les and simply needs retooling.

[CitizenDwayne]

Is it possible that Trae has been the target this whole time? Pelicans and Lakers were starting to show interest, so the two draft night moves may have been to strengthen their trade package.

But in that case would the Minny picks really make or break the deal?

[Bill_Brasky]

Why the would anyone want Jimmy ing Butler? God this site is re ed.

[ChumpDumper]

I do anticipate another year of salary floor soft tanking. It just makes the most sense from the ownership standpoint. I'm not saying I like it; my seeing it that way reduces wrist-slitting anguish to hopefully temporary resignation.

[Mr. Body]

I do anticipate another year of salary floor soft tanking. It just makes the most sense from the ownership standpoint. I'm not saying I like it; my seeing it that way reduces wrist-slitting anguish to hopefully temporary resignation.

If I see "soft tanking" as "win as many games as possible but don't sweat overdoing it," then I agree. And overdoing it I mean as making big trades for expensive vets. I do see interest in place-holder and instructive vets. I don't think they'll intentionally lose games or do weird lineups anymore, but they're still in "teach these babies how to play" mode.

And with Atlanta's pick probably late lottery, then they need to put theirs in decent position. Where Houston was this year would be good.

[J_Paco]

Yeah, I'm not feeling the patience or arguments after a couple of nights sleeping on it. Team rebuilding should NEVER trade away an 8th pick for another POTENTIAL lottery pick 7 years out. One that could easily be late teens even if everyone but Ant leaves. It's stupid, it's trading for the sake of trading and having a warchest, only there's literally 0 indication it will ever be used and PATFO are saying it won't. So if you're not trading for a player using the lottery picks and you're not using the actual picks from the lottery picks, WTF are you doing???

We should definitely trade for someone like Butler who can lift this team and help us grow since PATFO/ownership don't think they're a team rebuilding, but one that's already won multiple les and simply needs retooling.

I want no parts of Jimmy 'Cancer' Butler in a Spurs jersey. Yuck!

He'd wear out his welcome in less than a season and would be flipped for a lower return.

Why the would anyone want Jimmy ing Butler? God this site is re ed.

Right.

I think his short stint in Minnesota proves he isn't the best player for a young, underachieving, bottom 5 team.

[ChumpDumper]

If I see "soft tanking" as "win as many games as possible but don't sweat overdoing it," then I agree. And overdoing it I mean as making big trades for expensive vets. I do see interest in place-holder and instructive vets. I don't think they'll intentionally lose games or do weird lineups anymore, but they're still in "teach these babies how to play" mode.

And with Atlanta's pick probably late lottery, then they need to put theirs in decent position. Where Houston was this year would be good.

I think the only way a big trade happens early is if ownership is convinced it's almost a guaranteed home run by PATFO. I think the owners will follow the Holt tradition of spending big (relatively speaking) when the time is right. They seem to see these first couple Wemby years as a time to maximize profit off the hype which has so far proved immune to the heap of Ls the team has. They know they'll have to start spending that money soon enough.

[z0sa]

I want no parts of Jimmy 'Cancer' Butler in a Spurs jersey. Yuck!

He'd wear out his welcome in less than a season and would be flipped for a lower return.





Right.

I think his short stint in Minnesota proves he isn't the best player for a young, underachieving, bottom 5 team.

THIS team has Wemby. It's time to stop comparing us to other teams when we already have a centerpiece who's the best defender in the NBA and top 25 on offense, probably top 20 or better next season.

Butler is just a name. Someone who can help, and now. It ain't happening but I don't have to align my interests with the ownership/business side as a fan.

and also, supposedly, we have the GOAT coach as well. He's supposed to be able to bring the talent out, maximize player potentials, find diamonds in the rough and he truly has done so before. No more bull trades and draft/stashes, let's go big or let's talk about how the owners are penny pinchers denying Wemby any help so they can hold on to tens of millions of dollars. Pop is a willing ally but that doesn't mean he's even the one at fault, at least anymore.

[scott]

I hear you. However, what your asking for is blind faith: faith that they will demonstrate they have a clue or faith that they will do with the assets. I prefer to look at the evidence:

- The draft strategy is not consistent with making near-term changes. 2031 is not 2027. Drafting and stashing for cash considerations is not consistent with making nearer term roster changes to visibly improve.
- The DNA of PATFO does not include a willingness to make a blockbuster change. I agree with those who say Pop and RC are still heavily involved, if not driving the ship. I've said this multiple times, but the first time they push all their chips in will be the first (and I'm happy to eat crow on this if/when they do so).
- They've repeatedly said that they have a long runway and are committed to the nucleus of personnel they have. Draft night presented an opportunity to move off of Blake, Branham, etc... They "liked what we have."
- They've also indicated that mindlessly stockpiling assets is "always a good strategy." The fact that they think Vic will stick around is great - I hope they're right. Their strategy is to preserve ability when he's 28/29 - while overlooking the 7-8 years in between that point - which is just stupid.
- They absolutely are tanking. Several reports - including one from Windhorst - have stated they are looking to the 2025 draft. Their stockpiling of what is now looking to be mid-first round picks is consistent with that.

I agree that there is a rationale. I disagree that it is a sane one. If you look at the evidence, you see a front office obsessed with ac ulating assets with little-to-no near term vision on how to make improvements. Nor do you see any inclination as to when they'll "flip the switch," much less how they intend on doing so.

Spot on. If the draft is the primary mechanism by which team can improve... punting away Top 10 picks doesn't seem to signal a priority on improving the team in the near term.

[scott]

Is it possible that Trae has been the target this whole time? Pelicans and Lakers were starting to show interest, so the two draft night moves may have been to strengthen their trade package.

But in that case would the Minny picks really make or break the deal?

I could buy into the concept that moving #8 for more picks to package up in another move is the play... right up until I look at the return.

We can't trade the 2030 swap on it's own, we'd have to trade out #1, with DAL and MIN swaps attached, so an incremental second swap does very little to strengthen that pick (though it does, indeed, strengthen it - just not by all that much).

I don't think an extra 2031 FRP is going to make or break any contemplated trade.

Had we gotten some extra picks more near-term, I could see the argument.

[scott]

I do anticipate another year of salary floor soft tanking. It just makes the most sense from the ownership standpoint. I'm not saying I like it; my seeing it that way reduces wrist-slitting anguish to hopefully temporary resignation.

I hope we'll at least be a salary dumping ground. If we're going to be in the asset collection business, let's at least go all in on it.

[spurraider21]

Why are folks assuming I'm fine with trading away Dilly?

probably because everybody was justifiably screeching about trading the #8 pick and in the midst of all that you decide a post a thread telling people to relax and be patient

[Obstructed_View]

Yeah, I'm not feeling the patience or arguments after a couple of nights sleeping on it. Team rebuilding should NEVER trade away an 8th pick for another POTENTIAL lottery pick 7 years out. One that could easily be late teens even if everyone but Ant leaves. It's stupid, it's trading for the sake of trading and having a warchest, only there's literally 0 indication it will ever be used and PATFO are saying it won't. So if you're not trading for a player using the lottery picks and you're not using the actual picks from the lottery picks, WTF are you doing???

Agree. Unless I'm mistaken, before Victor, the last pick the Spurs had that was 8 or higher was Tim Duncan. You simply don't waste a pick like that for any reason when you are trying to build a team around a superstar. There is no excuse.

[Obstructed_View]

I could buy into the concept that moving #8 for more picks to package up in another move is the play... right up until I look at the return.

We can't trade the 2030 swap on it's own, we'd have to trade out #1, with DAL and MIN swaps attached, so an incremental second swap does very little to strengthen that pick (though it does, indeed, strengthen it - just not by all that much).

I don't think an extra 2031 FRP is going to make or break any contemplated trade.

Had we gotten some extra picks more near-term, I could see the argument.

Excellent point. Even if the Spurs could justify not adding talent, the asset that they traded for doesn't have equal value.

[scott]

Excellent point. Even if the Spurs could justify not adding talent, the asset that they traded for doesn't have equal value.

That is my biggest complaint and frustration about this whole thing once I move past the concept of a bad team punting a #8 pick. We just got terrible value in return.

[poopbox]

I want no parts of Jimmy 'Cancer' Butler in a Spurs jersey. Yuck!

He'd wear out his welcome in less than a season and would be flipped for a lower return.





Right.

I think his short stint in Minnesota proves he isn't the best player for a young, underachieving, bottom 5 team.

Don't worry. A player as compe ive as Jimmy Butler who has been to two finals in 5 years, would never ever play for a garbage ass organization like the Spurs who are more concerned with kicking the can down the road than winning basketball games.

If you ever saw a news article that said San Antonio Spurs trade for Jimmy Butler, the next article you would see would say "Jimmy Butler refuses to report because the Spurs are one of the 4 worst teams in the nba with no chance to do anything but loose their franchise player in 4 years"

I always fine this phenomenon of undesirable groups or people, and that what the Spurs are, an undesirable group, take a stance of "I would never want this person around" or "I never want this thing." It's like when a morbidly obese woman says I would never date this type of person. you weigh 330 pounds, you don't have to worry about dating anyone because no one wants you.

Spurs fans are always like "I don't want this player who has had some success in the nba because of blah blah blah." Meanwhile the last 10 times that player played the Spurs he won 9 of the games, and he is already telling his agent to block Brian Wright number.

[Obstructed_View]

I do anticipate another year of salary floor soft tanking. It just makes the most sense from the ownership standpoint. I'm not saying I like it; my seeing it that way reduces wrist-slitting anguish to hopefully temporary resignation.

Well said. But the Spurs could have done the same thing with another lottery pick playing in Austin. Worst case scenario is one or both of them blow up and suddenly the Spurs are good. I don't see the harm in that.

[ChumpDumper]

Well said. But the Spurs could have done the same thing with another lottery pick playing in Austin. Worst case scenario is one or both of them blow up and suddenly the Spurs are good. I don't see the harm in that.

it's difficult to comprehend the cascading meltdowns that would be triggered by keeping a lottery pick in Austin.

[DPG21920]

I would be pretty annoyed if SA could have just drafted Dilly and instead uses 4 firsts to trade for Trae or Garland for the ‘honor” of paying them 35+ when they have the same archetype as Dilly who allows you to keep all your picks and majority of cap space.

I don’t think SA is going to do that however thank goodness. I agree with Chump about Spurs plan. Just hoping they sign 2 quality vets that can shoot and play and force some guys down the rotation

[spurraider21]

I would be pretty annoyed if SA could have just drafted Dilly and instead uses 4 firsts to trade for Trae or Garland for the ‘honor” of paying them 35+ when they have the same archetype as Dilly who allows you to keep all your picks and majority of cap space.

I don’t think SA is going to do that however thank goodness. I agree with Chump about Spurs plan. Just hoping they sign 2 quality vets that can shoot and play and force some guys down the rotation

as somebody who loves dilly

same archetype isnt a guarantee that he'll be anywhere near as good (even though i like his chances, personally)

[DPG21920]

as somebody who loves dilly

same archetype isnt a guarantee that he'll be anywhere near as good (even though i like his chances, personally)

Sure, but not having to pay him 35M + give up 4 firsts more than reflects that risk and if you drafted Dilly to see how good he was because you are ok with that archetype then you can still trade for Trae or Garland if you dont like what you see because you still have plenty of picks etc…

[DAF86]

probably because everybody was justifiably screeching about trading the #8 pick and in the midst of all that you decide a post a thread telling people to relax and be patient

I forgot the art of reading is going extinct, tbh.

[spurraider21]

I forgot the art of reading is going extinct, tbh.

kind of. i just think your timing was poor

[Obstructed_View]

it's difficult to comprehend the cascading meltdowns that would be triggered by keeping a lottery pick in Austin.

Well God forbid someone has a meltdown. Sure a good thing the Spurs away a lottery pick to prevent that. Could have been a disaster.