Reply With Quote
yes please.
People view the value of this in the 22nd pick, but I actually think the Spurs would view Kuzma as the primary value.
They've long been fans and he'd probably be a good fit (I'm not a fan either and am well aware of his inefficiencies, so spare me).
If push comes to shove (Lakers either balk at 22 or Spurs aren't fans of player selected and/or Harrell opts out), I suspect they'd do it for him and Caldwell-Pope (rerouted to a third team).
yes please.
Can a sign and trade happen before the draft considering free agency doesn’t begin until after it?
Kuzma seems like a decent player off the bench, say, but his advanced metrics show him as negative on both sides of the ball. I wonder why. His stats aren't horrible.
Would you rerout Kuzma and Harrell to Sacramento for Harrison Barnes? Keep the 22nd pick, if Sac wants an additional pick, haggle but keep 22. Kuzma had his best seasons under Walton, plus if Kings deal Bagley and lose Holmes in FA, they will need the help.
Rather resign Dieng as back up 5 then have Harrell.
No.
Supposedly the idea behind this fantasy trade would be that DDR agrees to do a sign and trade and teams would work out the deal illegally. Sort of similar to what Milwaukee and Sacramento tried and failed last offseason. Basically it’s highly highly unlikely.
Also highly highly unlikely of Pop wanting to strike an illegal deal with the Lakers of all teams, so highly highly highly highly unlikely.
I don't remember a trade like this happening before, but I maybe it could be legal if the teams discussed it with DDR (and Harrell if he's in the trade and would have to opt in) beforehand. The teams agree in principle to the deal before the draft and the Spurs tell the Lakers who to pick at #21. Then they consummate the deal once free agents can sign contracts.
Is it illegal or tampering for the Spurs to allow DDR to talk to the Lakers prior to the draft? If it is then the whole deal is illegal and it won't happen.
Even if the deal is legal, there would be nothing stopping the Lakers from backing out if a player they really like unexpectedly falls to #21, or the Spurs from backing out if they make another deal that would conflict with the Lakers trade.
Would it be legal for the Spurs to send a short list to the Lakers on draft night and tell them "we will only do the DDR trade with you if you draft one of the players on this list at #21"?
I'm just thinking out loud here. If my understanding is flawed then I would appreciate being corrected.
Hard to be sure for me on the legalities. Bogdanovic was restricted, don't know if that makes a difference.
Chris Paul basically did the same thing when he orchestrated the trade to Houston, except he did have the player option factoring in.
One way to do it legally would be to announce the salary dump, Harrell and 22 for expected cap space and like a protected future second. Then after free agency starts, it's "Well wouldn't you know it, we can expand this trade! Let's fold in Kuzma and DDR while we're at it! Golly, what a fortunate turn of events.".
DDR can't speak to other teams yet. But his agent can.
I’d pull the trigger on a Derozan for Kuzma , Harrell and 22nd pick trade in a heartbeat
Lakers literally tried to fck sa over before. Im real hesitant on lakers giving us any value for ddr
Sure, but all the leverage is with the Spurs here.
sure,assuming lakers actually want ddr. If spurs can get kuzma and a pick id be fine with that
There are also comments on kemba to Lakers for kuzma. So I guess not derozan
Still holding out hope derozan brings spurs something positive in return
They have to be really dumb to add Kemba to this already injury-prone squad
ye, hope they do it though, kemba, and derozan not sure how they fit, so they wont win championship again
Walkers knees are dead.
DDR on the Lakers. It could help them with scoring relief, but like everywhere he goes, his negatives typically put a ceiling on the team. I mean, theres definitely a chance this hurts the Lakers and closes their window. Unfortunately, I dont see them offering what we need, other than that 22 pick, which would be great. Kuzma...maybe better than Laurie? I have to think about that. Neither are really good.
Me too. If it turns out he doesn't that would mean the Spurs lost Kyle Anderson, Bryn Forbes, Aldridge, and DeRozan-- four starters for them-- all for nothing. I'd say right now the FO is regarded as very strong with regard to scouting the draft, but not too versatile or resilient when it comes to trades.
Iīve said this for a long time.
They also traded Bertans for nothing. Even if heīs overrated and fans hate on him once heīs out the door, the point is that he was in high demand in the league. He had value. The Spurs got no value for him.)
When people blame all of the Spurs bad fortune on Kawhi, they omit the fact that its been a few years since that happened, and the Spurs FO has been crap at playing the field, the FO "game." They also IMO chose to "remain compe ive" when a rebuild was advisable, not just because Kawhi left, but because they sent Danny out, they let Anderson go for nothing and Timmy and Manu retired and Tony fell off a cliff and left. They needed talent to build around and could have found some assets including a player to build around by now, seeing as a few teams that had aging stars or adverse situations found themselves with top picks to build around and turned things around quickly. Itīs not going to be pretty until it gets better was my thought back then. I knew that once Timmy retired the team was going to be in nowhere land anyways before Kawhi came in as the purported heir. Itīs not bad management, itīs a fact of life, father time is undefeated, Kawhi stalled what was coming anyways for one year but he wanted to go back to California... He was an ass about it, but he would have left by not resigning when his deal was up anyways, and the team would have been where they are anyway.
Thatīs why a few fans also hoped for the tank back then, because the FO hasnīt been saavy playing the trade market and the team is unlikely to attract a FA star, the draft is the only way to turn things around with their current MO. Anyways, they did lose starters for 0 back, and some of those players had value around the league, maybe not the full value they wanted, but some value. They didnīt want to rebuild was their point. They didnīt want packages based on picks, etc. Well that limits the playing field. I wasnīt a fan of their choices and it soured me on the team for a good long while.
Last edited by SAGirl; 07-07-2021 at 12:05 PM.
What the Spurs essentially got for Bertans was a 99% chance to sign Morris for the MLE; the only reason the Spurs did that trade was because Morris verbally agreed and they wanted to honor their offer to Carroll. Morris reneging was something players almost never do and you can't blame the FO for that.
You also can't reasonably expect to get value back for every single player that ever leaves. Not re-signing a free agent opens a roster spot and allows for more cap/tax flexibility, and not every team that signs a Spurs free agent can be expected to do a sign-and-trade to give an asset to the Spurs.
yeah-blaming the spurs FO for the bertans deal is a reach because the spurs thought they had morris, which would have been a solid acquisition only to have him do something that was almost unheard of and shady (even morris admitted as much)
The Spurs were awful in that stretch. Morris hurt them badly reneging on his deal, but Spurs could have extracted something from Washington, a desperate franchise, or whomever, and on top of that one of the reasons they had to trade Davis IIRC had to do with them not wanting to renege on their own awful deal with Demarre Carroll.
When you go back and look at the Pau Gasol deal, and look at other moves they made in FA, it all keeps casting a bad light. They didnīt nail any FA move they made for a few years in a row, and missed on plenty of opportunities to extract some value from young players they developed and had no plans for.
Thinking about this, they probably will re-sign Walker and we have to hope he continues to improve. They arenīt saavy enough to get him on some kind of deal to get some value back... and letting him walk again when they spent resources developing him should be avoided if possible.
Of course if he becomes surplus because they draft somebody who makes me as a fan not care about things like that Iīll be happy. True stars are able to conceal many flaws, like bad FO choices, which unfortunately probably will only get exposed in the playoffs (the Mavs are a good example)... anyways, not happy with the FO FA skill tbh.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
