Reply With Quote
They're guards who'd be in Philly. Not getting the issue.
Those players were headed to Philly in the scenario he laid out..
They're guards who'd be in Philly. Not getting the issue.
Who are we getting?
Horford and picks. The post was pretty clear.
For DD and LMA?
It's all in the post. If you had no idea who was being traded and why, why did you react to it?
Because the post is a mess.
I love the Horford deal in the framing Chinook described. He’s a fine player for rebuild on the fly & get picks? Absolutely
Yeah but most Americans are fat.
If you can tell me what that deal is, that would be great.
It's perfectly understandable to everyone else.
Id rather have the cap space and sign people to two year deals with the second year being unguaranteed until we found our stars.
If they really felt the need to do a trade like this I’d rather have Harris. He could play small ball PF if needed to give our younger guards some running time together. Especially if we draft a player at 11 who is a PG, SG, or SF.
This way you can just keep Aldridge. I’ve noticed people around the league are giving straight up trash for Aldridge in trades. I’d rather just keep him.
I don't want the team to trade LMA either. But if he wants to go, you let him. But I don't think the Spurs should get in the business of experimental one-and-ones. If they're going to use their cap space to try out vets, let it be by them renting that space for short-term deals in trades. Basically next year (meaning 2021-2022) Horford will be a Gasol-esque semi expiring. I'd rather get paid to take him one than let Aldridge expire and then sign some rando for a similar deal.
Also, I don't agree on Tobias. Harris is a legit awful contract. Horford is overpaid, but he's been very good for a while. Between the two, Al definitely has the better contract. Harris is a legit candidate for worst contract in the league with Wall and Middleton. It would be hard for the Spurs to build anything with that on the books.
To be clear, I don't actually like that Horford deal all that much. I think it'd have to be part of a larger deal where Al gets moved to GS for Wiggins and somehow gets SA up to 2. Then you can keep LMA and avoid having to pay as much long-term salary as you would if you traded LMA there and DMDR for more money.
Like:
SA -> DeRozan, 11
SA <- Wiggins, 2, 21
GS -> Wiggins, 2
GS <- Horford, Thybulle, 11, 35
PHL -> Horford, Thybulle, 21, 35
PHL <- Williams, Beverly, Kabengele
LAC -> Williams, Beverly, Kabengele
LAC <- DeRozan
To me, that's more of an ideal DMDR trade. SA picks up a pick and gets a shot at a superstar in exchange for one of their best players and having to absorb an awful deal. It's possible other teams wouldn't go for it. LAC I'm not worried about, since they are giving up the bare minimum. If anything, I think they should give up more if they had it. Philly shouldn't have an issue if their goal is to build a more balanced team around their three best players. They have a ton of picks in the middle of the draft, and I don't think Morey is against moving a couple get off the Horford deal. Whether he'd hold out on 21 or not being willing to include Thybulle are the bigger question marks. Without 21, it's less worth it for SA but probably still doable if they can package 35 with 41 to get a late first. But I think Thybulle is key to GS doing their end.
That's why GS is cut out of the iteration of this I proposed earlier. I think it still works with 11, LMA and one of those seconds for 2 and Wiggins -- like I think GS take that and runs. But Horford AND Wiggins is a ton of bad salary to end up with to only have one extra pick. Add in the extra cost to of the higher pick, and it's a huge financial commitment. So keeping SA's take as Horford, 21, improving 41 to 35 and maybe a future pick or swap and then worrying about SA moving LMA or Al somewhere else seems like a pretty conservative stopping point.
The only way you take on Horford is if Thybulle is included imo.
re: assistant coaches and Duncan
I had thought awhile back that it would be nice if Gentry or D'Antoni would join the bench to hang out with Pop as former co-workers he was comfortable with, but they both took assistant jobs with contenders and probably for a lot more money that the broke Spurs could come up with
So now the question is, who replaces Duncan if/when Duncan decides he's not coming back? I think I know.
Roy Rogers
He was on Boylan's staff in Chicago that all got let go when Donovan took over. He also started his whole coaching career in Austin under Snyder. He's bounced around a lot, but is free for work as far as I've seen. Roy Rogers, next Spurs big man coach.
These Horford trade ideas are not appetizing.
At least the rationale in the supposed Wiggins-LMA trades is that he's still an okay player in his prime and you're getting compensated with the #2 pick for that terrible contract.
But the Horford rumors are to get a washed and decaying Horford and not appearing to get anything worthwhile for it.
Wiggins isn't "okay", Horford isn't "washed" and how is something like the 21st and 34th picks not worthwhile?
Add those to the 11th pick and let's say a lottery protected '21 1st from the Trail Blazers for Aldridge and they'd be in position to make a compelling offer to the Warriors for the 2nd pick.
They need inexpensive depth/youth and still have the Timberwolves '21 top 3 protected 1st to potentially add a more significant long term building block.
So if we would use all those picks to get GS are you saying you would rather have Horford the Wiggins?
Absolutely. Still easily better overall, a better fit with the "culture"/youth and cheaper.
If they could do that and the 3 team trade I suggested, they'd have a rotation of . . .
Horford/Gay/Lyles
Fournier/Johnson
Wiseman/Horford
White/Walker
Murray/Mills
Kabengele, Samanic
Where did Fournier come in and I disagree with you I would much rather still have our 11th and have Wiggins plus the ability to trade DDR then to have horford. Difference is only 2 mil and Wiggins if he becomes good fits in with our timeline.
D’Antoni never worked with Pop. His only Spurs connection was a brief stint as a player before exile to Italy.
I'm skeptical of Wiseman's upside, but I'd take the potential core building block over a clear two way net negative with an albatross and 11, a likely role player who'd fit better on a good team. Wiggins has been in the league 6 seasons; he is what he is and what he is in the exact type of empty calories type they need to get away from. Horford, even in a diminished state, is the an hesis.
If they were interested in being the Hornets, they wouldn't have traded for DeRozan or retained Aldridge in the first place. If they move away from them, they're still most likely going to want credible older players to keep them pseudo compe ive while helping shepherd the youth along.
My trade also has wiseman in there. it would be LMA for Wiggins and #2 so we would get #2 and #11. thats why I would rather have Wiggins then Horford. Also in your trade are we just sending Picks to GS? Clippers get DDR and Portland gets LMA. Why would GS do that trade of just picks? They want a win now player.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
