Reply With Quote
Addition by subtraction. Don't let the door hit you on the way out
I would much rather let him walk then have him on the team another year. He controls this but I doubt we can get much for him in a trade.
Addition by subtraction. Don't let the door hit you on the way out
Agreed he needs to go. It would be a shame if you got absolutely nothing back, but they need to if it comes to that.
i honestly don't see a big market for demar... he showed who he is in TOR.
maybe masai would be interested? off the top of my head, i think just... TOR, DET, NYK would have some interest in demar.
If he opts in or out but works with them on a sign and trade, I suspect they'll push to pull off a trade like the one with the Pistons I proposed (DeRozan, White, 11 for 5 and Kennard), because that's probably the only way they're going to get marked value.
On his own, he probably fetches possible salary filler plus 1-2 of: decent young veteran, heavily protected 1st (the convoluted type that could convert to 2 2nds if not conveyed by whenever), or C prospect verging on bust.
I don’t want any of that, and I don’t want to ship out any of our young players just to get rid of him. The Kawhi trade was never going to be a success. At that point, LMA and DD were nothing more than a bridge to the future. We’ve crossed that bridge, and it’s time to let DD walk, and play the young players. No point in turning this into a g-league player to be named later in a few more iterations, as the returns get worse and worse.
Such short sighted thinking. How do you know one of those things doesn't become something worthwhile? Or become part of another trade down the line for something worthwhile? Or frees them up to move a piece they otherwise would have been reticent to for something worthwhile?
This organization needs to be in asset collection mode, taking baby steps, trying to hit as many singles as they can.
If push comes to shove, they can't afford to turn down any potential assets, no matter how minimal they are.
How do you know the player we sign does not be come great or any of those other things you listed? If it is a 2nd then he is almost a FA that we could find now. If it is a FA that is on the way out then he would be taking a spot on the roster. Having the extra spot/money can also be considered an asset.
Good, young assets generally come via the draft or trade. Sure, you'll see the odd Dinwiddie, Harris, etc. signed and go on to become an asset, but it's rare.
The extra money is irrelevant. They have plenty of cap space going forward, no superstar/star is signing here and they're too senile to use the room as a dumping ground for dead money to collect extra picks.
Extra spot, also irrelevant. If need be, they can always cut loose some fringe player, like Metu.
I would still trade DeRozan for Batum. Yes, Batum has a ton of shortcomings at this point, but I still think a 6'8" guy who plays a little bit of D, shoots the three, and would be happy as a reserve would be an improvement over a guy who needs to star with tons of minutes and takes away development time from White, Murray, and Walker. It's addition by subtraction, plus a 15 mpg role player. Maybe Charlotte throws in something else, like a second rounder.
I want Hield. He is not happy in Sacramento.
Both players you listed were actually drafted. They were drafted in the second round. When you get that though you also usually get a bad contract with it. Unless a team can absorb his salary in cap room they also have to send someone back. this takes a spot and money. A second rd draft pick is not much higher odd of finding someone the finding someone on FA.
Extra cap space can be used to facilitate other dates and get asset back from those trades so money can be relevent. I think ATL, Bklyn and bostn have done this.
You down play metu. I understand what you are saying here but Metu should be getting PT. Also what im talking about is picking up a flyer that turns into someone . I not talking about getting someone off of buyout. these players would not replace someone but could fill an empty spot.
I meant when they got to the Nets.
I don't foresee the Spurs making any trade involving DeRozan where they take back a bad contract.
Again, when I see the Spurs absorb dead money into cap space to collect more picks, I'll believe it.
Metu was just an example of the type of minimal fringe player type that always gets traded/waived if need be to create roster space in trades.
I would say there are probably more players in the NBA that got pick up with a new team or went undrafted then were drafted in late first or second round.
Why would someone give us a good player for him. If it is just a pick they have to have cap room to absorb DDr contract.
The Spurs usually dont have money. Dont think they will have much even if he leaves but until they have room it is hard to know if they would do that or not.
So you don't want the possibility of finding a diamond in the rough just because of the unlikelihood of doing so . . . meanwhile, there's no downside to going this route.
Someone will give something of decent value, but as I've said, the best chance to receive marked value is to combine him with other asset(s).
Same could be said for the roster and if they are serious about playing. I don't see it. Zero commitment to defense, zero on-court leadership, non-compe ive, Uggh, this team should have been blown up.
I’d put much more faith in our FO finding a rough diamond than picking through other teams trash.
The possibility at what cost though.
There is downside as the player we get will eat a roster spot and possibly some cap space. If we get a first back unless we send him over seas will cost roster spot for years.
If we packaged him with someone to get someone good then maybe it would be worth it. (but some here will think someone else should have been traded). Haveing to package him with someone to get something of value shows how little value he has.
That was one example of the type of asset they might receive.
Again, if/when he gets traded, I suspect it'll be for something like the Pistons one I proposed, where they land a potential core piece.
Failing that, I actually think they'd retain him for a final season before they'd trade him for one-two of the three lesser assets. Then, either try to work a sign and trade the following off season or lose him for nothing.
You're overthinking this. A roster spot/cap space are not issues in this situation. What is, are assets, particularly of the high end variety. The next best thing to those is depth of assets. By adding to the pile, it creates more possibilities down the line.
I think you are thinking we get back a much better asset then we do. Bet the best we would get back as far as a pick would be a low 1st. I dont even think we wold get that back.
A draft pick is what the Spurs need as their record on that front is excellent.
neither one of those really entice me.
Murray, White, Walker, Samanic, Poeltl
Weatherspoon, Forbes, Johnson, Lyles, Metu
i wish this was our 8 game lineup. Maybe patty instead of Forbes for these 8 games.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
