Reply With Quote
Yes, we can't change the past... and that's why the Spurs can't let their roster mistakes turn into coaching mistakes. They over invested in their center depth. The solution to that is cutting the worst centers ... not getting rid of one of the top-two centers so you don't have to admit you made a mistake. If Landale or Eubanks doesn't want to stick around due to not being in the rotation, you let them go and use the spot on a player somewhere else. I like both, but they're replacement-level guys, and you don't need to make big roster decisions over those kind of players.
Putting these together since they're basically the same argument. There's a fine line between being realistic and appealing to tradition/nature. We both can agree that the Spurs will make certain choices regardless of how we feel about them. That's why we aren't talking about retroactively passing up on Collins. But it's okay to separate what we think the team should do and what we think the team will do. You're probably right that the team will play a similar rotation as we saw in most of the pre-season with Murray, White, Johnson, McDermott, Eubanks becoming Forbes, Walker, Vassell, Young and Eubanks. Pop will probably start the season that way and adjust if he feels he needs to. It's likely McDermott with vacillate between the bench and starting unit, likely with Vassell or Forbes. Some of us will probably be complaining about the rotation just as we always have. We know this. But that argument has limits, because it pushes out questions about what the Spurs should do -- like the premise of this thread/article. The Spurs shouldn't trade Young unless they're looking at a good return. They should work on integrating him to refine their bench into a strong unit. They should also figure out who their prospects are and develop them instead of clogging the minutes for their younger players and making them play in the d-league so worse prospects can keep getting minutes.With how preseason played out, it's pretty clear that winning isn't the top priority. If winning was the top priority, preseason would have been spent figuring out how to integrate Young as the bench facilitator. Instead, the Spurs didn't run a single play for Young in the preseason.
I don't disagree with much of what you posted but I'm basing my opinion off of the current realities as I see it.
...
In theory, all of those solutions are possible but none of them appear likely. Not signing Forbes in the first place could have solved the issue. But they did. Now of those solutions you described, probably the most likely is trading Walker -- and that's not likely.
I agree the Spurs' sole priority isn't winning games, and it shouldn't be no matter what right now. But their goal is definitely not to tank, so they need to balance out development and performance, and they can do that in many ways other than dumping Young. Will they? Who knows, and maybe not even. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't do it or that doing it would be the smart move.
Wait, no. You were just arguing for keeping AFA due to his contract potentially being useful. Young's floor is Aminu at this point. If the possible downside is to go from a meh or bad second to him just being somewhat buoyant filler, that's okay. The world isn't going to be saved by having that second, but this season could be a pretty productive one if they can get Young to play well. Young more than anyone else would be a great bellwether for the overall cohesion and flow of the bench. Them playing well with Young most likely means guys like Walker and Vassell are also playing well, and that's probably the best potential outcome for this season.Basically, I want the Spurs to either use Young properly or trade him at his peak value. It's pretty clear they have no intention on maximizing Young's skills so trading him at his peak value is the only avenue left. The moment the regular season starts and Young is averaging 6, 3 and 2 or whatever, his value plummets to zero.
The Spurs should draft a center and stop messing around. They've needed to do it since 2015 (and yes I did just have another capillary in my eye burst when I typed that -- thanks for asking). That reality isn't changed by Eubanks or Landale, so I really don't care if they're around for the next half-decade or whatever. They are good depth and maybe useful rotation players. But the Spurs aren't in a position where they need to worry about that. When it comes to times to actually make playoff runs and they don't have roster flexibility or salary space then cheap useful guys are gems. They're currently in a position to cycle through guys like that now.Eh, Eubanks and Landale might not be young but they could be pieces that stick around for the next half decade. Young, even if things go well, wouldn't be re-signed (or at least shouldn't be re-signed) unless the Spurs win like 45+ games this season with Young playing as well as he did last season. Even then, do you want to re-sign a 34-year-old Young? I'm not sure I would.
If Young is playing well and wants to stay, I'd absolutely extend him. It's not even a question. There's no good that comes from getting young just to be young. Him playing well, helping mentor guys and creating good flow is exactly the type of benefit the team should be hoping to get out of their vets. The Spurs are not the Hinkie-Sixers. They're trying to make a contender through development, not ac ulating high picks. So the goal isn't going to be giving minutes to all the young guys and seeing if one becomes a star out of nowhere. It's going to be creating an environment and culture that hopefully leads to learning how to play the right way. I'd rather give money to a proven older vet than continuously extending mediocre draft picks under some idea that guys need 10 years to develop or whatever the Spurs are doing.
That's fine. Buying out Young is fine if it comes to it. I mean if he has been asking to be traded, they should definitely do that now. But if he's not, the Spurs should be willing to end up losing him for nothing. It'd be their own faults for keeping him if they don't value him. Out of all the acquisitions on the team now, Young has one of the smallest downsides. Unless we hear the Spurs have been passing up on expirings and firsts for Thad, there isn't a bad outcome with him.Overall, I see where you're coming from but after factoring in roster decisions (loading up on centers, re-signing Forbes to muddy the swingman waters, etc.) and what I saw in preseason (Young being an Al-Farouq Aminu-level afterthought), I think trading Young now is the best move. Otherwise, by far the most likely outcome is the Spurs buy out his contract at the trade deadline.
This, why people continue to give this moron any credit for checkers type moves is beyond me. He's also probably untouchable for the next 10 years if the old man and the drunk are still running the organization....
