Reply With Quote
Glad the Saddiq thing was somewhat addressed!
https://www.spurstalk.com/further-lo...aft-decisions/
If you wish to read another 2,000 words about what the Spurs did in the draft, there you go, tbh.
Glad the Saddiq thing was somewhat addressed!
Nice post. Totally agree-- if the 41st pick gets you a reliable pitbull defender back up PG, you've drafted well.
I really don't like that the Spurs didn't take a trade down. I hope Vassell proves me wrong, and I don't dislike him or anything. But it seems pretty clear that at least one future first was going to go their way, probably from OKC. It's not even like Haliburton would've been a bad player to be stuck with.
Agreed. They could have done things in reverse. Drafted Halliburton (raises overall team ceiling) and drafted a Tre Jones-level wing defender with the 2nd round pick.
But these guys get paid the big bucks, and I'm hoping to be proven wrong (Vassell being better than Hali)
Good stuff. I'm fully convinced Vassell was their guy. I'm also convinced he would have had a chance to rise if the NCAAT had been played -- Florida State was a dangerous team and he was their best player. Entertaining trades once Halliburton dropped makes sense, but were too risky to pull the trigger. My gut says he has a lot of growth possible on the offensive side. Too many fans are cramming him into the 3-and-D Danny Green box and I think he's much more.
If Jones is anything like his brother, he will be a servicable PG for years. That's a great value in the 2nd round. I'm not actaully clear why he wasn't a late 1st round pick, although the draft was thick with piont guards. Especially not clear why his UNC counterpart Cole Anthony was picked twenty-some picks earlier.
If Vassell is a major part of the rebuild, then you don't trade down without knowing you can still get him. My guess is they canvassed the teams above them and thought he would drop. Not knowing the teams after them, the were unsure who might take a flier on him and didn't want to risk it. Not a big deal.
I also read about Haliburton and his agent reportedly hiding certain medical info. From teams to engineer his fall.
https://sports.yahoo.com/did-tyrese-...223935779.html
You never know how much of that article is true but may have been another reason for the reticence on Haliburton.
Wow-- if true Haliburton lost out on a lot of money. It's hard to believe that of all the teams to cherry pick, he and/or his agent would aim for a notoriously bad and mismanaged one like the Kings.
That could've happened (Woodard got snagged one pick before SA could make that choice). I would've just been okay with him. But I really liked Nesmith, so if Boston had been the team to take Aaron still and wanted to trade say 30? I might've really liked that. There were good players still on the board at the end of the first that the team missed out on at 41.
I’m good with Vassell and agree no NCAA tournament helped him fall to the Spurs. FSU built a solid team, and he was their best player. Would have shined on national stage.
Reason they didn’t trade down or draft Halliburton and try to trade him for more assets was that Vassell likely would have been next off board. It’s not like they were targeting someone that was going to fall (like they could have done last year with Saminic!)
There is literally no reason to engineer a “fall”. With rookie scale contracts, each drop costs the player hundreds of thousands of dollars over the rookie deal.
That doesn't make as much sense as you're implying. If they didn't know if teams immediately after them wanted Vassell, then they couldn't rule out being jumped for him, just as teams tried to jump SAC for Haliburton. You're right that if the team wanted Vassell that badly, they should've kept him. But then they shouldn't've even entertained trades.
I agree it's unlikely... That's why I finished with It's hard to believe that of all the teams to cherry pick, he and/or his agent would aim for a notoriously bad and mismanaged one like the Kings. I was just commenting on the article. That being said, players do occasionally make decisions where they lose a lot of money, like Hayward opting out of his contract today.
Good read. Was there any truth on the LMA and #11 to GS for #2 and Wiggins? And only spoiled by Klay's freak accident? If so, would Spurs kept #11 and offer Murray or Walker instead?
Nah, you're wrong. If Halliburton dropping changed the dynamic of the teams around them, the Spurs should have done their due diligence and seen if they could squeeze teams. They could either let Vassell go if the package was right or take an informed decision to drop and hope he was still there. Obviously they kept the pick, but they needed to take requests. That's why there's a clock.
Like R.DeMurre said, unlikely but def. possible.
Could potentially make the money back in endorsements, income tax breaks - not to mention right positional need and fit allowing a player to showcase their ability for future marketability. It’s why a Wiseman didn’t want to play in Minnesota for example.
So the ACC Player of the Year “stumbled?”[Jones is] never going to be a star, so it’s not a surprise that he stumbled when too much was put on his plate.
Yeah, he stumbled in the eyes of scouts ... thus why he fell to the second round after entering the year with a first round grade, tbh.
Over the past decade, Duke guys who've won ACC Player of the Year have had mixed success. Nolan Smith (2011) and Jahlil Okafor (2015) have been busts. The jury's still out on Marvin Bagley (2018), but he has certainly underperformed so far. Zion's the only one that looks to be a big winner. Hopefully Tre can add to that success.
Great writeup. But I'm curious how you ended the article with "Well done, for now, Brian Wright". Already skeptical of Wright?
Thanks TIMVP.
Still befuddled by the FO's decision to stand pat and make no trades even to get more draft capital later in the draft. Rudy Gay, Patty Mills, Poetl, Aldrige, and Demar either are RFAs now or will be FA next year. Given this and the fact that they cant re-sign all of them, it makes zero sense not to trade any of them for additional assets. Given what you wrote about the problems with giving Poetl a long term deal, not at least packaging him and Patty or Gay for a late first or early 2nd seems dumb.
Good writeup, as always.
Jones as a safe pick at 41 is a great move.
"But if you’re judging Vassell, Bey and Nesmith by their hypothetical peak value, Vassell is the one who has the highest ceiling."
Vassell only has upside if he is hitting 3's at a good clip. Otherwise, his floor is much lower. I really, really don't like that video of him shooting 3's with that nasty motion. Even if he really was just screwing around, an elite shooter spends time reinforcing muscle memory, and not screwing with his stroke.
It will probably take a couple of seasons before we see whether Vassell's upside can overtake Bey's plug-and-play value. Especially if Pop doesn't throw him right into the fire.
You don't have to engineer medical info to undermine Haliburton -- just watch him. He's very skilled but not very athletic.
He's a better version of George Hill. If you could trade him for Kawhi Leonard, that would be fine. But that's way too many ifs.
timvp were the Spurs hoping to land Killian Hayes?
I understand the Tony part of this but Manu as well?
I'm still holding out hope that we do a trade with them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
