I want to look at this from a different angle. As Murray is the guy, what kind of player will play good off of him both offensively and defensively?
Fournier and Randle are equally bad contracts so getting paid two future FRPs to get off those deals is a no brainer.
I want to look at this from a different angle. As Murray is the guy, what kind of player will play good off of him both offensively and defensively?
Actually, as an aside, assuming assorted big FA targets fall through (Lavine, Ayton), does taking Randle, from the Knicks, into our cap space, make sense; assuming they send a couple of FRP's along with him? (I am sure they want out of that contract, the question is how much will they pay to do so.) He'd be a decent fit in SA as a primary scoring option, and Poeltl beside him to cover for him on D...
7. San Antonio has Injury Management Experience
Like I’ve been saying, he ain’t goin anywhere. He’s stayin’ in Chicago.
That’s probably a 200k deal.
Danny Green was on local commercials long after his departure from TO.
Yea that doesn’t confirm anything . Local businesses doing what they can to get him to stay, and Zach gladly securing the bag.
i was gonna say, how did kawhi manage to leave despite his HEB promos
Agreed. Lavine doesn't address our need for more size (athletic size) at all. And that's really the Spurs' biggest weakness. The teams that had the Spurs number this year were usually the teams that could overwhelm them with larger, stronger players.
That doesn't say prima donna management experience.
^ Such flawed thinking. As if having quan y = quality. None of them are in the same league as LaVine nor are any likely to be.
This team desperately needs a go-to scorer and whenever they luck into it, it's most likely going to end up being a guard/wing anyway.
This is a very relevant comment. If we did end up acquiring him I’d hope we took precautions like managing back to backs. Primo and Vassel as quality backups could make that work.
I disagree that size is our biggest weakness. Our bigness weakness is a lack of elite talent. We have tons of average talent, and I don’t want to pass up elite talent at G just because our average G talent is better than our poor F talent
timvp - are you planning on doing any sort of holistic write up covering trades/draft/free agency and what you would like to see and what you think might happen?
That's true. We get Lavine and then our weakness moving forward can be our lack of size.
Do you think Lavine would be the Spurs go-to scorer? He defers to DeRozan on the Bulls roster.
...and we'll be stuck on that 5-8 treadmill, unable to afford anyone else.
Why do you keep saying this? They'll have plenty of flexibility after signing Lavine, way more than if they just extended Johnson. Being over the cap is good for a team trying to reload. The NBA is a trade league, not a signing league, and getting an All-Star on the books while keeping the trade assets is great.
The kind of player we need to contend can't be traded for, because teams won't trade them.
The irony of this statement in a discussion about signing the marquee FA of the summer, admittedly a rather sparse class.The NBA is a trade league, not a signing league, and getting an All-Star on the books while keeping the trade assets is great.
So you know that's not how this works. Stars are traded for way more often than they're signed outright, and teams trade them all the time.
Things seem "ironic" when you clip a sentence out of a paragraph. The point was that because stars are usually traded for, you need to use cap space when it's there. You can't keep it long-term. The Spurs are in a much better trading position if they are able to go over the cap and have two All-Stars and exceptions rather than having a bit of cap and only one All-Star and the room exception.The irony of this statement in a discussion about signing the marquee FA of the summer, admittedly a rather sparse class.
Stars usually force trades. They also usually want to go to bigger, or perceived better markets than us. We weren’t even a draw during the Big Three era, only managing one signing towards the tail end of the run.
Two picks from 5 and 6 years ago... No thanks.
The stars force trades, they don't actually pick their destinations. You offer the best trade package and then hope the roster and culture keeps them for a few years. If SA is so unappealing they aren't going to keep stars no matter how they acquire them. Moreover, worrying about stars not wanting to stay in SA as a reason to not sign Lavine doesn't make sense.
We’d actually he well positioned as we’d have multiple players who’s bird rights we own that we could use in the trade.
Some combo of JRich, Jak, Vassell, Keldon plus future oicks could be used to bring in a 3rd player.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)