Reply With Quote
So far, they’ve declined at that price.
So they still have 2024 and 2026 picks, right? Or they can't trade those? If I'm the Nuggets, I'm trading them. It's worth the gamble.
So far, they’ve declined at that price.
They can't - Stepien rule.
I don’t think you can find a team outside of Denver who would pay SuperMax for a player with two back surgeries and seasons of zero and nine games played before age 24.
Contract ain't looking so good now and might be the one reason Jokic never rings. DAF86 is spot on though, Durant, Jokic, and a healthy Murray would be about as nasty a trio as the NBA has had since our Big 3, which was arguably one of the best ever.
Does anyone have access to this ESPN+ article about the recent rash of future pick trades?
https://www.espn.com/nba/insider/ins...nted-nba-trend
The part I could read looks like the rest is interesting. Most of the league overvalued firsts for a long time, now the pendulum is swinging the other way for a few teams.
I've mentioned somewhere else -- there's a weird thing happening that this article may get into. It's hard to put my finger on it, but it's a ac ulation of how the draft has gotten younger, the league has gone toward development, a lack of truly exceptional teams leading to more top-level parity, the Stepien rule, teams reluctant to trade (or trade for) established players, a free agent market that has gotten drier and drier.
It's hard to know what to make of it, but there's an ongoing shift in the draft and trades.
They could offer unprotected pick swaps in 24,26,and 28 and an unprotected first in 29..
Oh, I agree that trio would be fairly lethal. I just don’t see any path for Denver putting that together. None.
No. No they can't per the Stepien rule.
In this case, it’s actually not the Stepien rule. It’s the fact that those Denver traded FRPs in 2025 and 2027 have 3 years protections, each. The 2027 pick is so fluid, it may not start clocking until 2029 and for 3 years subsequent if the 2025 pick is slow in conveying.
You can’t do a pick swap in 2026 or 2028 when there’s a protection flow over on that year already.
Thank you for the correction.
That's what I meant, but I erroneously stated the Stepien rule.
Poeltl will most likely command a contract starting above the MLE next season. That means there could be value to the Spurs keeping him into the season: either a team will be willing to pay up for him at the trade deadline to make a playoff push (looking at Toronto, assuming they don't address their C position in the offseason), or the Spurs can sign-and-trade him to an over-the-cap team that otherwise couldn't afford him in free agency. That team could send a pick back as compensation for them getting a player they otherwise couldn't.
I like Poeltl and want to keep the guy, but he could end up being a win-win-win situation, if the cards are played right.
Shams Charania ShamsCharania
2m
Minnesota Timberwolves No. 45 pick Josh Minott has agreed to a four-year, $6.8 million rookie deal, sources tell @TheAthletic @Stadium.
Yeah, another one. Lots of interesting second rounders this draft. Lots of people said it was a sh1tty draft because it lacked the hype some other classes have at the top... but I think a lot f good players will come out of it even far into the 2nd round. Kennedy Chandler, Bryce McGowens, EJ Liddell (unfortunately tore his ACL), Josh Minnott, Kamagate, Kendall Brown... Don't get me wrong, I love the draft we had & the Barlow pickup, but I just won't be able to help feeling a bit uneasy if one of them pans out.
Shams Charania ShamsCharania
2m
Minnesota Timberwolves No. 45 pick Josh Minott has agreed to a four-year, $6.8 million rookie deal, sources tell @TheAthletic @Stadium.
Would be Hilarious if the spurs traded for Westbrook then made the playoffs over the lakers tbh lol
Yeah Minott was one I really liked and with the Spurs said to have worked him out twice iirc at the time made me think he was targeted. Mocked him up at 25 even at one point pre draft due to some hype. Was surprised when 38 came up and we dumped it because there were some gems still avail and we already had done so well, like why not add to the horde?
Spurs knew what they were doing I guess. Same thing with Days. I mean, Spurs could've offered if they wanted to? Maybe Days didn't say yes? Spurs also could've picked at #38, no one forced them not to. So SA either didn't like the players, the players didn't like them, or the team thought they had what they needed or all they could handle.
Just kinda tired of the narrative every time it doesn't work out that the Spurs are bumbling or let one slip away.
Brian Wright knows what a phone is, he has the numbers, he makes the calls. It's just not a Hollywood movie. In real life you might get ready but sometimes it never comes. I'd rather be positioned with flexibility when the sucker deal comes out of another team's desperation or some churro loving prized FA wants in for some reason than to get that chance and be caught with your pants down, lacking on the financial or otherwise team flexibility to make it happen. Sometimes no news is good news. Means Wright is playing it tight and holding his cards close to the chest. Good deals don't come along often, that's why they are good deals. So the disciplined team that resists bad trades ends up not making many moves at all. Same people complaining pick up the phone Brian would also complain at lateral moves just for the sake of doin deals.
I wonder if the asking prices for Kyrie is to high for Flakers and if we can just do a trade for Westbrick straight up for a unprotected first. Would that then give them cap room to say go after someone like Sexton?
It's impossible to get every player. Clearly the Spurs valued Branham and Wesley higher than Minott, and it's not a hard pick. He was not good in college, while the other two were. Minott did well in summer league, but it's a setting made for athletes. By many accounts he struggled with rotations and common, everyday team basketball at Memphis, which is why he wasn't played very often. He'd blow up defensive sets because he didn't know what to do. This isn't anything against him; it just means he's more of a project. In the big league it may be a while before teams don't feast on him.
Days... It happens. He's hardly a sure-fire hit and Barlow was the player the team took. We also picked up Roby, who has proven he can actually play in the NBA already.
If the Spurs are looking for a player at this point, it's not a big, it's a point guard.
And with the acquisition of Roby, Spurs really don't need a Minott type development project anymore. Plus concerns I had of being a product of that program and the red flags associated. Pre draft was a different perspective for sure and Minott was trending. Hindsight can clarify a lot lol.
Not sure if SA knew that Roby was a possibility but between Roby and Barlow that role is better tended to in the end anyway. So it all works out, except that PG you mentioned, which could've been Kennedy Chandler but I wan't totally enamored with that project either. He was 3ast/6to ratio today. But 10/4/3 overall, just good enough to give you fear of missing out but maybe the point guard version of the "Roby solution" looms just ahead too then?
I also think the Roby pickup was the reason the Spurs decided against signing Days. You already have Sochan, Roby, KBD at the 4 spot and Keldon can play it too. Without Roby I think the Spurs sign Days.
I still would have signed Days to the two-way anyway with Barlow as the other 2-way and promoted Weiskamp to a full deal. Surely by now the Spurs know if they have something in Wieskamp.
Im just curious. What happens to all money not being used? $30 million in cap space, Does it go back to the Spurs owners (money saved) or the NBA? I ask simply because attendance is low these days. Could this also be killing two birds with one stone? We rebuild and the Spurs owners take less of a hit to the pocket while we’re in rebuuld with low attendance? With all the Spurs moving to Austin talk in a few years it just makes me wonder. Assuming the Spurs owners save or pay that money, would the Spurs owners want to pay $30 million for 1 future first round pick taking on Westbrocks contract? Im guessing it takes 10 home games to generate $30 Million in revenue. Im just thinking of this from a prespective of keeping the Spurs in San Antonio.
The salary cap amount is not real money, it’s only the result of a calculation. It tells the owners how much they can spend on player salaries (without resorting to special rules.)
The owner is required to spend 90% of the salary cap amount on player salaries, as a condition of keeping the franchise. The players’ union demanded that, and got it, years ago.
Cap space is the amount the owner could have spent on player salaries, but did not. It represents money the owner still has, or at least, that he hasn’t spent on player salaries. So as you mention, it’s money saved by the owner.
The guys who talk about moving the Spurs seem to think the move would be free. I guess they think U-Haul would donate the trucks, the community would donate their time to load the trucks, Volaro would donate the gas, the Spurs would drive the trucks themselves, and away they’d go, to play in a public park somewhere. Sure. You bet.
It could easily cost as much as two billion dollars to move the Spurs, all things considered. That never gets mentioned.
Give to the players on roster. So say keldon gets the money.
OKC had that this year I think. So that will be the sample
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
