Page 14 of 48 FirstFirst ... 410111213141516171824 ... LastLast
Results 326 to 350 of 1195
  1. #326
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Post Count
    5,339
    There’s no difference in the talent available at 5 or at 7.
    I'd still rather be at 5 than 7..even if talent is equal you can prioritize fit..

  2. #327
    Veteran exstatic's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    40,489
    Tre Jones. Zach Collins.
    Gotcha. A second rounder and a scrap heap reclamation. I’m more worried about trading 4 players for 0 after you cut Russ.

  3. #328
    Body Of Work Mr. Body's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    25,517
    Yes - but they aren’t true parts of the core IMO. They are replaceable players IMO that are able to be had via FA or draft.
    I didn't realize you were shipping out Doug McDermott and Josh Richardson, too, all of them for a single pick. That's amazing.

    The other point -- you should think of this in terms of opportunity cost. Jones and Collins aren't world-beaters, but they are good, developing players. What will it cost you to replace them with similar players? More than you think. You have to think of movements and trades not like you're in a video game where the abstraction of picks is all that matters. It's like trading Poeltl, if on a smaller scale. If you trade Poeltl, how do you replace Poeltl? What does that cost you?

  4. #329
    Veteran scott's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Post Count
    11,913
    Now that we are a bottom 3 team, I really don't like the flattened lottery odds

    Loved 'em when we were always picking 29 or 30.

  5. #330
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Post Count
    5,523
    Fake Trade:

    Lakers Get: Kyrie + Josh Richardson

    BKY Gets: Doug + Tre + Zach + 1 Lakers unprotected 1st

    SA Gets: Westbrook (whom they waive so he can sign with a contender) + 1 Lakers unprotected 1st


    My thoughts: If LA is really trying to win, and willing to give up 2 firsts this gets them more than just Kyrie in Josh Richardson to help with depth. BKY doesn’t lose Kyrie for a nothing player, gets 3 solid rotation pieces to help now and shaves their 100M tax bill in half while still getting a great pick as well.

    SA loses only Tre from the “young” core, keeps rest of core including Jak for another deal/to re-sign and while they maybe should get more than one first for giving up Doug/Zach/Tre/Saving BKY a ton of money, they get the best possible one pick so quality over quan y.

    The trade literally cannot happen without either (1) the Spurs participating, (2) the Nets being okay keeping Westbrook (may piss off KD in process to strip assets away) or (3) parlaying Westbrook to a third team for a more useful, albeit bad contract that extends beyond this year.

    One first while giving up several useful pieces, plus renting out the only cap space in the league, isn’t adequate compensation. The Spurs have $27 million in space, and only one other team has more than a million (Indiana at $9 million).

    Screw the Lakers. I would much rather trade Poeltl, McD, Tre, Richardson in one or more separate trades. Their combined value plus the cap space available is worth more than one first. Like they showed last trade deadline, the Spurs can string together multiple deals.

    If the Lakers want the Spurs’ help, there has to be pick swaps in addition to one unprotected first. Otherwise, they’re stuck with Westbrook.

    And if people are worried about losing Poeltl and Richardson for nothing in FA, Poeltl for one will almost certainly command a premium deal and need the Spurs to facilitate a sign and trade.

  6. #331
    Veteran exstatic's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    40,489
    Now that we are a bottom 3 team, I really don't like the flattened lottery odds

    Loved 'em when we were always picking 29 or 30.
    It’s a better system, even though it might bite us in the ass. It was designed so that no other team would ever go through The Process for five years, and they won’t. There’s no incentive to, at 14%. It was terrible for their fans, and a black eye for the league.

  7. #332
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,206
    There’s no difference in the talent available at 5 or at 7.
    Disagree and I bet from a trade value teams disagree. Getting who you want FOR sure vs having to hope for a player to fall 2 spots is big IMO

  8. #333
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,206
    Good point.

    But the way the Spurs FO evaluates talent, the guy they would take after Wemby might be the consensus No. 2 pick or might be the No. 10 pick.

    The difference between 5 and 7 might (but likely won't) make a difference.
    It will in trades. Hypothetical: let’s say SA gets pick 5 and DET gets pick 2. They already have Cade and maybe they listen to Keldon + pick 5 + future first for Scoot? Would they do that for pick 7 instead?

    Maybe small chances, but in a rebuild like this it all matters. Every bit of value.

  9. #334
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,206
    I didn't realize you were shipping out Doug McDermott and Josh Richardson, too, all of them for a single pick. That's amazing.

    The other point -- you should think of this in terms of opportunity cost. Jones and Collins aren't world-beaters, but they are good, developing players. What will it cost you to replace them with similar players? More than you think. You have to think of movements and trades not like you're in a video game where the abstraction of picks is all that matters. It's like trading Poeltl, if on a smaller scale. If you trade Poeltl, how do you replace Poeltl? What does that cost you?
    Don’t need to worry about fringe rotational guys in a rebuild as much. Spurs would have tons of cap space and can use what they were paying Doug (15M) to replace Tre and still be net even on money for example

  10. #335
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,206
    The trade literally cannot happen without either (1) the Spurs participating, (2) the Nets being okay keeping Westbrook (may piss off KD in process to strip assets away) or (3) parlaying Westbrook to a third team for a more useful, albeit bad contract that extends beyond this year.

    One first while giving up several useful pieces, plus renting out the only cap space in the league, isn’t adequate compensation. The Spurs have $27 million in space, and only one other team has more than a million (Indiana at $9 million).

    Screw the Lakers. I would much rather trade Poeltl, McD, Tre, Richardson in one or more separate trades. Their combined value plus the cap space available is worth more than one first. Like they showed last trade deadline, the Spurs can string together multiple deals.

    If the Lakers want the Spurs’ help, there has to be pick swaps in addition to one unprotected first. Otherwise, they’re stuck with Westbrook.

    And if people are worried about losing Poeltl and Richardson for nothing in FA, Poeltl for one will almost certainly command a premium deal and need the Spurs to facilitate a sign and trade.
    Don’t understand your first point. This is a hypothetical where Spurs are in and making it work for the other teams.

    To your other point: I get what you are saying and it’s valid. I personally think quality over quan y matters and I would rather have 1 unprotected first while taking on zero money next year than say breaking it up into 3 separate deals and getting 3 lottery protected firsts for example.

  11. #336
    Veteran exstatic's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    40,489
    Disagree and I bet from a trade value teams disagree. Getting who you want FOR sure vs having to hope for a player to fall 2 spots is big IMO
    I’m not talking specific players, just level of talent. The Spurs don’t lock in on a player, anyway. They just pick from their board of 60 players whoever is the highest eval left.

    The draft has been judged by analysts, multiple, to be pretty flat from 3-14 or 15. That’s either good, you’re getting high lottery value at 14 or 15, or bad, you’re getting late lottery talent starting at 3.

  12. #337
    Formerly Spurs21 KingKev's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Post Count
    5,327
    Kanye Irving…

    Our cap could really grease the wheels in this drama

  13. #338
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,206
    I’m not talking specific players, just level of talent. The Spurs don’t lock in on a player, anyway. They just pick from their board of 60 players whoever is the highest eval left.

    The draft has been judged by analysts, multiple, to be pretty flat from 3-14 or 15. That’s either good, you’re getting high lottery value at 14 or 15, or bad, you’re getting late lottery talent starting at 3.
    But talent for SA isn’t only consideration. Trade value, etc..all matters even if its material. It’s why you don’t see a ton of trading back that close. It happens, but not that often

  14. #339
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,206
    Kanye Irving…

    Our cap could really grease the wheels in this drama
    You like my trade proposal?

  15. #340
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    7,879
    Time to dust off those ole 3 way trade proposals from earlier this year...

  16. #341
    Veteran Dverde's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Post Count
    3,748
    Hardaway Jr, Bert, FRP for Kyrie? Even if Kyrie is a disaster, the Mavericks would get off those two bad contracts for only a FRP. More of a move for the Nets to rebuild and trade KD. I don’t see KD wanting to stay beyond this season and will force his way out.

  17. #342
    Veteran exstatic's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    40,489
    Kanye Irving…

    Our cap could really grease the wheels in this drama
    I had forgotten that Indy helped us two ways: by taking a quality center off the market, and using their cap room,our only compe ion in that department, to do so.

  18. #343
    Formerly Spurs21 KingKev's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Post Count
    5,327
    You like my trade proposal?
    I’d rather not help the Lakers that way tbh.

  19. #344
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Post Count
    5,523
    Don’t understand your first point. This is a hypothetical where Spurs are in and making it work for the other teams.

    To your other point: I get what you are saying and it’s valid. I personally think quality over quan y matters and I would rather have 1 unprotected first while taking on zero money next year than say breaking it up into 3 separate deals and getting 3 lottery protected firsts for example.
    All your eggs in one basket for a 2027 pick that could theoretically be in the 20s? Say Lebron leaves in 2025, and they have a clean slate. They could easily retool in FA (it’s LA after all) and you’re picking outside the lottery. They have zero incentive to tank.

    On the first point, how many paths are there to a Kyrie-to-Lakers deal that do not involve the Spurs? The Spurs’ cap room is the most valuable commodities in the deadline as it’s scarce. The Nets don’t want Westbrook back, as it kills any chances this year. So if they want a team to dump him on, there are very few that work. And the Spurs, meanwhile, can bid up the value for their space.

    When only one team (well: two with Indiana) has space, it’s extremely valuable at the deadline or right before free agency. You can bet PATFO want more than one first out of this trade season. It may not happen , but they’re aiming higher.

    The only thing working against space is that teams can aggregate trades together - waiting to put them into league office - and make the 125% of outgoing value into much bigger numbers.

  20. #345
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Post Count
    5,339
    I’d rather not help the Lakers that way tbh.
    I kinda feel that way too... I'm not saying I wouldn't do a deal with them but, I'd want the farm to help them...not just 1 pick

  21. #346
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,206
    I’d rather not help the Lakers that way tbh.
    You think the lakers are going to win it all due to Josh? I would say robbing the lakers of a top 3 pick when LeBron is long gone potentially is helping sA.

  22. #347
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    76,206
    All your eggs in one basket for a 2027 pick that could theoretically be in the 20s? Say Lebron leaves in 2025, and they have a clean slate. They could easily retool in FA (it’s LA after all) and you’re picking outside the lottery. They have zero incentive to tank.

    On the first point, how many paths are there to a Kyrie-to-Lakers deal that do not involve the Spurs? The Spurs’ cap room is the most valuable commodities in the deadline as it’s scarce. The Nets don’t want Westbrook back, as it kills any chances this year. So if they want a team to dump him on, there are very few that work. And the Spurs, meanwhile, can bid up the value for their space.

    When only one team (well: two with Indiana) has space, it’s extremely valuable at the deadline or right before free agency. You can bet PATFO want more than one first out of this trade season. It may not happen , but they’re aiming higher.

    The only thing working against space is that teams can aggregate trades together - waiting to put them into league office - and make the 125% of outgoing value into much bigger numbers.
    All your eggs? It’s a guaranteed first and we lose who that is hard to replace or meaningful for wins?

    The path for Kyrie to LA with no Spurs is easy. Literally Russ for Kyrie.

  23. #348
    Body Of Work Mr. Body's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    25,517
    All your eggs in one basket for a 2027 pick that could theoretically be in the 20s? Say Lebron leaves in 2025, and they have a clean slate. They could easily retool in FA (it’s LA after all) and you’re picking outside the lottery. They have zero incentive to tank.

    On the first point, how many paths are there to a Kyrie-to-Lakers deal that do not involve the Spurs? The Spurs’ cap room is the most valuable commodities in the deadline as it’s scarce. The Nets don’t want Westbrook back, as it kills any chances this year. So if they want a team to dump him on, there are very few that work. And the Spurs, meanwhile, can bid up the value for their space.

    When only one team (well: two with Indiana) has space, it’s extremely valuable at the deadline or right before free agency. You can bet PATFO want more than one first out of this trade season. It may not happen , but they’re aiming higher.

    The only thing working against space is that teams can aggregate trades together - waiting to put them into league office - and make the 125% of outgoing value into much bigger numbers.
    Yeah, I figure you'll have Giannis or Doncic on the Lakers by the second half of the decade, along those lines. Those FRPs aren't that appealing.

  24. #349
    Veteran exstatic's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    40,489
    All your eggs in one basket for a 2027 pick that could theoretically be in the 20s? Say Lebron leaves in 2025, and they have a clean slate. They could easily retool in FA (it’s LA after all) and you’re picking outside the lottery. They have zero incentive to tank.

    On the first point, how many paths are there to a Kyrie-to-Lakers deal that do not involve the Spurs? The Spurs’ cap room is the most valuable commodities in the deadline as it’s scarce. The Nets don’t want Westbrook back, as it kills any chances this year. So if they want a team to dump him on, there are very few that work. And the Spurs, meanwhile, can bid up the value for their space.

    When only one team (well: two with Indiana) has space, it’s extremely valuable at the deadline or right before free agency. You can bet PATFO want more than one first out of this trade season. It may not happen , but they’re aiming higher.

    The only thing working against space is that teams can aggregate trades together - waiting to put them into league office - and make the 125% of outgoing value into much bigger numbers.
    Indiana gave their space to Myles Turner for his extension. We’re the only game in town for big cap space.

  25. #350
    Veteran Ariel's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Post Count
    3,356
    Fake Trade:

    Lakers Get: Kyrie + Josh Richardson

    BKY Gets: Doug + Tre + Zach + 1 Lakers unprotected 1st

    SA Gets: Westbrook (whom they waive so he can sign with a contender) + 1 Lakers unprotected 1st


    My thoughts: If LA is really trying to win, and willing to give up 2 firsts this gets them more than just Kyrie in Josh Richardson to help with depth. BKY doesn’t lose Kyrie for a nothing player, gets 3 solid rotation pieces to help now and shaves their 100M tax bill in half while still getting a great pick as well.

    SA loses only Tre from the “young” core, keeps rest of core including Jak for another deal/to re-sign and while they maybe should get more than one first for giving up Doug/Zach/Tre/Saving BKY a ton of money, they get the best possible one pick so quality over quan y.
    Richardson & McDermott for Westbrook + an unprotected pick seems ok. But why add Tre & Zach? I'd say chances are not high that you can get a better player than Tre even with a better 2nd rounder than what was used for him (#41 I believe). I'd expect him to command ideally a couple good 2nds, at the very least one. As for Zach, he's on a cheap contract with low guaranteed money, he's a useful guy for some team. You don't need to put together a winning team for the young core to develop, but you can't rid yourself of every single guy with some experience, and they're not costing us lottery odds, so why get rid of them? It's a total tear down, I'm not totally opposed on paper if the price is too good, but I'm not sold this is the case here.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •