Reply With Quote
I still don't like the idea of Spurs helping the Lakers in case.
I still don't like the idea of Spurs helping the Lakers in case.
Damn.. it feels surreal that the Spurs are on a "Process" mode after years of championship-contending followed by some years being in the fringes of playoff contention. Feel sorry that players like Poeltl, Richardson (apart from Murray & White) are being jettisoned left, right & center. They could have been pieces contributing to a core if the championship contention period endured a bit more. Alas
ST would go crazy if the Spurs take Westbrook's contract for a single FRP but this would be the most likely scenario if such a deal happens. First of all Brooklyn won't trade Kyrie as a simple salary dump, they'll want assets and Lakers are very short on assets, so it'd be almost impossible to construct a 3-way Spurs-Nets-Lakers deal if all picks go to Spurs. Also, Indiana now have the ability to facilitate the trade while possibly sending away players that Lakers might like such as Turner and Hield, which would compromise the Spurs's negotiating position.
I'm not sure I'd do a Westbrook + one unprotected 1st but this might be the best offer on the table for the Spurs. Generally unprotected firsts are super valuable, it's just that the Gobert trade has detonated NBA trade value perceptions.
It'd be ok to simply hold on to the cap space for now, there'll be plenty of possibilities to use it all the way up to next year's draft. Spurs must have held conversations with other teams , so they'd know what other deals could be in play, especially with some high profile players expected to be traded - Durant and Mitc , but also some others could be on the way.
With the projected luxury tax distribution projected to be over $25 mil for each non-tax team and 12 teams in the tax, there'll be some of them looking to get under it, or at least reduce their tax.
Good stuff.
Spurs are well positioned to extract value from the teams involved in Mitc /KD/Kyrie trades.
We can also ask them eat McD or Langford
Yes, good. Continue to blow it the up. I will be pissed if the Spurs win more than 15 games this coming season.
Exactly, basically Nets don’t want to eat the difference between the Irving and Brick contracts, which I think is about 10M. Spurs can send out contracts so that they’re not eating even most of the Brick deal.
Great they are firmly committed to a strategy.
Why. What’s more important to you, the spurs getting better or the lakers getting worse? Pick one
I don't like helping the Lakers, but then again adding Irving won't make them win a championship with all the garbage they got on the roster. Spurs should be able to at least get 2 first round picks by taking on Westbrook and moving Poeltl/Richardson. Maybe even more. 2 more unprotected firsts would be a nice haul
They’ll have to eat someone. We have $36M in cap room, and Russ makes $47M. It would be nice to offload McD, but either he or JRich would make the $$$ work.
Bailing out the Lakers of their stupidity. And the Lakers don't have enough assets to unload Westbrook to us. One FRP for 47mil?
Yeah, I'm not a fan of that move. Only getting one FRP (even if it is unprotected) doesn't sit well for me.
Yeah, only 1 first for that much money is ridiculous. It might be better than nothing, but it's a bad look for the Spurs being unable to leverage their space like other teams have.
Am I reading this correctly? It's suggesting the Spurs would be willing to trade away Poeltl and Richardson in addition to absorbing Westbrook in exchange for a single unprotected pick. For me, that's not okay. The only way it's a little acceptable if it's Richardson, McDermott, Poeltl and Langford for Westbrook and the pick AFTER the Spurs are able to use their cap space to acquire even more picks. The idea of trading away valuable players and cap space for such a minor return just wouldn't sit right with me.
One UNPROTECTED FRP is pretty decent for renting cap room, even a lot of it. If we can send back the last two years of McD, that would be alright. We could then monetize both Poeltl and JRich for future assets.
If the alternative is to waste the cap space away, what would you prefer? Lakers need to eat a contract from us so sending away McD and get an unprotected FRP and maybe one or 2 SRP.
I don't care about McDermott. I do care about adding Poeltl and to a lesser extent Richardson into the deal and only coming away with one pick (no, the seconds don't count).
Nah, I will not send Poeltl or J. Rich away on this deal, they probably can get protected FRP on their own. Sending McD away helps to open up cap space next season, in case we need it.
Okay, but my whole post is about Poeltl being mentioned as a throw-in for a Westbrook trade. If you don't think that's okay either, then we're not in disagreement. It doesn't bother me to help the Lakers. Doesn't concern me at all. But panicking on a Poeltl trade would.
I agree. The only involvement I would be happy with is Russ + unprotected FRP for either McD (preferred) or JRich. The Nets would need to receive something, and they have an exception large enough to fit Langford if we want to save a few bucks.
agreed
poeltl is too valuable to merely be “filler” for a trade.
Would the Spurs buy out Westbrook at that point, or would he stay for the season?
This season is going to be a disaster no matter who’s on the team. I would hope they can get more than one first round pick for Westbrook, but I am sort of warming up to the idea of Westbrook being the tank commander, basically, I’m just embracing the dysfunctional aspect of the moment. This is going to be a super boring season and Westbrook just somehow might keep it more interesting? I don’t know, still thinking about this.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
