Reply With Quote
I would try to get a pick for him and let him walk
He is to up and down
He needs to be more consistent
He can have a bad game but he has more bad games then good ones
https://www.spurstalk.com/should-san...nie-walker-iv/
It's a tough call, tbh. I can be swayed either way. But I think the situation will be a lot clearer after the draft.
ICYMI: Was the Spurs Season a Success?
I would try to get a pick for him and let him walk
He is to up and down
He needs to be more consistent
He can have a bad game but he has more bad games then good ones
It would be inserting if Becky was more responsible for improving Murray then pop
I really hope Doug and Richardson are traded for picks. Richardson because his value is likely higher than it will ever be and Doug because he isn’t good and needs to be off the books for a do over.
Then Lonnie can be kept as long as it’s not a crazy deal (4/40 or 3/30)
5 for 35 if kepted
Spurs option after 3
Good article
I shared my thoughts about him in the Walker extension thread. I have a question for you, how do you interpret his minutes limitation in the play in game. I assume it’s the back but him liking those twitter comments about him getting more playing time due to his scoring ability introduced doubts.
close call, id say let him go
I say let him walk. I don't even know what kind of contract another team would give him. Could he get the full MLE? I wouldn't be surprised if he has to take less
No room in the roster, no guaranteed role. Time to wish him well and move on.
His minutes during the play-in is the biggest indicator that he is gone.
Agree on McDip but disagree on Richardson; the latter fits well with this group. Also wouldn't go beyond $8mil/year for Lonnie tbh.
Hopefully gone. ~6.5mm QO triggers a cap hold of ~13mm complicating our free agency. Someone will make an offer more than we are willing to pay probably in the area of 8-10 million and I’d hope we let him walk at that point.
For the ppl who think we should sign and trade him that is a very remote possibility as once he signs an offer sheet with a team you can’t than match and sign and trade him to that team as he is an RFA. Also I doubt he has any trade value to begin with.
We have the best version of Lonnie with the Spurs at the end of the year, it will be strange to let him go now that he's improving ( better at the rim, better passer), offcourse for a reasonable price.
Agreed about the flaws, he's a scorer of the bench and you don't give him more than MLE type of salary for 2/3 years and then you see.
Personally I believe Pop tends to favor players based on his personal relationship/chemistry with the individual
It was clear to me that Lonnie has a higher ceiling than White and should have been invested in more early on. I'm glad Manu came along, he seemed to have convinced Walker to play to his strengths and not let pressure of trying to confirm to the version of the player Pop may envision. With White gone, and the freedom to be the primary scorer on the second unit I think he has found his niche. Would love to keep him.
Let the market set his price, and if reasonable (no more than MLE range) match it.
What’s wrong with Lonnie is between the ears. Nice kid, but it’s time to go. I wouldn’t hate a 1 year deal if we are unable to do anything better with the cap space
If I am Lonnie I would go somewhere else for a fresh start. I would get away from Pop as fast as I could. Maybe go to the Lakers who need the athleticism.
He should be gone and I won't miss him one bit. 6.3 million is his qualifying offer, I'd match and if somebody offers more Adios
No one is going to absorb them into cap room, meaning contracts coming back, meaning no extra room to re-sign Lonnie.
No one wanted to trade for him at $4.5M at the deadline.
Lakers only want olds.
Here's the thing. The problem with Lonnie is his BBIQ. He doesn't have the desire or drive to figure out the rotations, etc. When it takes the FO having to decline an extension to get him to work, the decision is already made. The fact is at that point, if you do re-sign him, he'll just fall back to his average after you sign him.
You don't re-sign him at this point, but if a sign &trade is there or if you can help him in some way, you do it, because that is who we are and that's our reputation.
We wish him the best.
Lonnie, with his first step, is like that NFL WR who runs a 4.3 40yd, but balls bounce off his hands. Athleticism isn’t the be all/ end all. It’s nice if it’s part of a complete package, but in this case it isn’t. His offense is his best attribute, and even that is awfully inefficient. His defense is Forbes level bad.
I'm torn on this....my default position has been to do just that but, I kinda feel like we are entering a DJ timeline where we need to cash in a pick and a young player for a win-now player and push for a real playoff spot next season. In that scenario keeping Richardson makes sense (I'm assuming Doug would be part of the package to acquire said win-now player as salary ballast).
Disagree - especially on Richardson. And if you don’t believe anyone would absorb Doug that’s further proof it was a really bad signing.
But I’m assuming he still has plus value so even if Sa had to give a second to dump him it’s not a big deal.
Lonnie can be kept regardless; SA has his rights. I was more talking minutes justifications, not money regarding Lonnie
I think Richardson has more value so he is who I would use either way. Overall I just think that while Richardson was great, his value may never be higher and if you can get a FRP for him or use him + a pick to net a better player then I would take that value vs extending him etc
Doug, I think still has some value to teams but his money just needs to be reset either by trading him to a team with cap space or used in a deal as you mentioned.
But I can see something where Sa trades Richardson for a FRP and then uses Doug in a deal where they give up a 2nd (so net out an extra first for a second and uses the money a bit wiser)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
