Another way to look at this: What’s the risk if SA is “wrong” here and gets “fleeced” by only getting one pick (if Jak is involved and its one pick I will be pissed lol. Saying mine without Jak)?
There is no downside. Sure, left some on the table but didnt do anything to mess up young core, didnt do anything to harm the flexibility and they still added maybe the most premier pick on the market at the moment.
You may argue upside is limited some, but downside for this “mistake” is pretty non existent considering they can still rent out cap space for volume picks next year too. No opportunity cost lost there.
Exactly. And I would get it if I was asking for a run of the mill pick. But this is, IMO a crazy valuable pick we are discussing here. SA can still get lottery protected firsts for cap rental next year. The ability to nab unprotected firsts is the new gold in the NBA. Getting them is hard without giving up all stars and all SA has to do is give up Doug/Collins/Josh and pay no extra money on their cap?
Put in that way it seems freaking obvious to me lol but maybe I just see things differently.
Spurs only have 62.5 on the books next year so in my view 13.75 is a drop in the bucket of space and might not be a factor worth changing things over but you are correct in that SA has a publicly stated priority right now of flexibility in all forms, chiefly financial.
How many teams are looking at getting their tax bills down? It seems like smaller deals may be the way to go.
I just don't see how an LAL/SAS/BKN trade works. If didn't work last summer and it doesn't work now. The Lakers just don't have enough picks to give to the Nets and the Spurs to make it worthwhile to both.
Ya - but instead of having “Doug” in that money, SA now gets a reset with that 13.75M and can sign someone(s) to replace Doug that maybe fits better, has more upside etc…and still have the cap space they were planning on if Doug was still here
I think between getting some good players and one pick from LA BKY should be happy. Especially if they can maybe do something like this (just an example):
LA Gets: Kyrie+Josh Rich
BKY Gets: Bojan Bogdanovic+Tre Jones
DET Gets: Doug McD+Zach Collins+LA unprotected 1st
SA Gets: Westbrook+LA unprotected 1st
So BKY turns Doug+Zach+1st into Bogdanovic & shaves ~40M off tax bill?
Again, I think it comes down to SA being happy with not including Jak, not taking on any real money and being ok with 1 unprotected pick (and maybe some 2nds from LA and BKY etc..)
Agreed. Doug is def not in the long term plans of SA enough that it wouldn't sting if Doug somehow was a hindrance or obstruction to some potential better fit down the line or needed future flexibility.
Good news. Let's hope we get at least 2 first rounders out of it
I don't know why you're obsessed with giving up four players, two of whom are still developing.
And for giving up all that and eating Westbrook salary the Spurs just get one draft pick.
Because they are completely replaceable maybe outside of Tre and even that is not a huge deal to me with all the picks and cap space SA has moving forward. What is harder to get: an unprotected first from a team with a history of sucking like LA or finding players of Doug/Josh/Tre/Collins caliber when you have max money and picks? Seems pretty straightforward.
Again to be clear: I am painting sort of “worst case scenario” where I would still be very happy. Of course I would prefer to get this deal done and keep Tre or get more than the one pick. But if you’re trying to argue the difference in celebrating landing an incredibly valuable pick and begin upset is the inclusion of Tre? Then ya, I really don’t understand that POV
Yup. That Lakers '27 especially looks to be a high end pick. Bron will either be washed or with whatever team Bronny is on. Brow will be elsewhere or as injury prone as ever. And they'll likely have any other talent expiring with no FRPs to rebuild with. If Kyrazy is there he'll undoubtedly be in a cult by then and winning even fewer games than he is with the KD less Nets are presently.
Don't see any other NBA all-stars going there on long term contracts beyond the next couple years in Lebron's remaining window.
In summary, there is am above average shot both the 27 and 29 picks are top 10.
Only issue here is assuming we have a young core. This board thought we had a young core with DJ, White, Primo, Poeltl, and KJ in the fold. Now we have KJ, Poeltl, Vassell, and Sochan (won't include Tre in a "core").
I'd say it's feasible only Vassell and Soxhan are left in 2 or 3 years. Maybe even just Sochan.
Thus, I'm not sure there's really a core per se that we should be worrying about maintaining or protecting from trade.
That said I'm high on Langford's future. Collins could be a solid piece. Combined with Vassell and Sochan there might be enough to build around if we get Wembanyama or Scoot.
The dream is still alive boys. Make it happen PATFO.
The Nets are bent over a barrel here by both the Lakers and Spurs. Irving already said he'll just sit out if not traded per Stephen A Smith, so their leverage is pretty ty here and they'll have to take what they can get instead of nothing. They'll probably get a protected first out of the Lakers. But the Spurs can demand an unprotected first out of the Lakers because the trade can't happen without them. Plus it would also give the Lakers significant luxury tax savings and the Nets enormous luxury tax savings by taking Westbrook.
That’s fair but point I was making is more that SA retains all their most valuable pieces. Whether they are a core alongside hopefully a Wemby or Scoot or they are traded for solid things, Spurs arent giving any of that up in this deal. Its all still there for SA to decide what to do and move forward.
The Spurs don’t drive the ultimate outcome of where Irving ends up (or what other trades go down), but as long as Wright is in the fray on every possible deal, they will extract their pound of flesh.
A trade with Clippers is almost more palatable(depending on compensation) as instead of taking back a Westbrook supersized contract, they can take a couple smaller ones that can be sent out immediately (either would have to be aggregated into larger trade, or traded on their own). Clippers have six guys making between $10 and $17 million.
Heck, the Spurs can even get involved in an Irving trade and take on guys like Reggie Jackson / Amir Coffey in pure dumps while sending out Richardson / Collins to Nets, and get a first rounder back in the deal AND still not add additional salary. Meaning they can use space in other trades.
Teams will try to reduce luxury tax burdens, but in addition to having space that can be used to ease that burden the Spurs have a bunch of reasonable tradeable contracts that can help bring up the 125% of outgoing salary numbers for teams. The bigger the trades, the more room there is to operate.
tl;dr version - I think the Spurs can come out of this with a lot more than one first rounder. Lack of sellers exist out there.
Get on the train y’all! My Spurs deal is going down and I want to be engraved in the SpursTalk fake trade that mostly happened hall of fame with some of the legends that came before me
Just because players are replaceable doesn't make dumping them for no reason make sense. It costs to replace them.
The trade can go through Utah. There are other options.
I wouldn’t be very happy to get a ty contract and just one 1st round for Josh, Doug, Zach and Tre.
Only in your world is a truly coveted high potential first round pick “for no reason”.
What contract is ty for the Spurs?
Exactly, let’s stay focused here.
Thanks to Timvp for this. The two new nuggets here are:
1. BKNs interest in Collins;
2. LAC offering a pick for spurs to eat bad money in 3 way deal
Let’s also not discount the CHA pick (basically 2 seconds) being used here to grease the gears.
What is the only contract we’re getting with your trade ?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
