So the tank is on again in 24-25? Prolly not, though I don’t think that is what you were really trying to imply, either.
Oh the Tank is definitely on for 2025 this class is going to be special we can legitimately get our second best player from this draft and possible two if the Basketball Gods are kind to us with Atlanta and Chicago picks. After 2025 I am off the Tanking and all for trading and getting a good veteran bench.
Have you ever seen a draft where the destination (Spurs this year) could be considered the first pick and not the prospects? The lottery should be played this year between the players, not the franchises: "And the first pick (Spurs) is awarded to... drum roll... [happy player who wants to play with Victor]".
Anyway, if there is no good PG available in this draft, aren't there PGs playing internationally that the Spurs own the rights? Or veteran PGs playing in Europe who might fit the roster? Mike James, Okobo, Hifi, Baldwin, Jerian Grant? You even have French PGs pushed towards the exit of the NBA that it could be wise to test (all three good defenders): Maledon, Hays, Ntilikina. Given the current level of the draft, it seems vain to hope to recover a starting PG this way. PG and centers are the positions that take the most time to develop. In this sense, Spurs should perhaps not expect to find a future starter in the draft and simply take the player with the best market value in the short and medium term. Draft and stash your lottery pick could be the motto this year... Topic could then show what it's worth in Europe next year. Only defensive wingers would be useful from next season (Risacher/Salaün/Williams).
Question, would any of these rookies start for the spurs.
Dilly has zero NBA games and we do'nt even know if he'll ever be a legit, productive NBA player.
Trae Young is a proven 3 time all star, 1 time All NBA Team who averaged 25pt-10ass this season on 37% 3pt shooting...
I believe the risk is way much bigger, specially with Wemby waiting for help, picking a 6'1 rookie than getting a proven NBA star. Obviously.... Sure, there's the economic part, but that's what you're paying for: proven talent. You have zero guarantees with Dilly, not like he's a generational talent either. Probability is he'll never reach Trae level in his career.
Do spurs want to take the risk and wait 2 or 3 years only to realize the guy isn't even a starter next to Victor..; then pick another rookie? We can't say this draft is weak and rave at all these kids for the spurs.
Last edited by JPB; 1 Week Ago at 10:59 AM.
Unless you have Steph's incredible shooting skills, you're exposed as short, leading guard in the POs. none of these guys will get to the finals this year, if ever as a top dog... Kyie got a ring but that was 8 years ago and he was arguably a generational talent, if he ever had the head to go with his skills.
What you want is that long versatile guard/wing, to ring today, not a short guard. Looking at the last 6 or 7 NBA finalists and winners none of them had a starting 6'1 PG.. And this year:
- Suns are a first round out with Booker and Beal (both won't probably never make the finals).
- MIL with Lillard is in bad shape. Pretty sure they'll never ring with Lillard who never made the finals. Pacers won't ever make the finals with Haliburton as their starter either.
- NY with Brunson is 2-1 but that's because Embiid is ailing (and PHI might win the series) Pretty sure Brunson and Maxey will never make the finals as starters.
- NO is 0-3 with Zion out and CJ who who never saw and probably will never see the finals.
- MIN is in good shape but Ant is their real PG, Conley (who never made the finals) is basically a shooting guard and I do'nt beleive MIN make the finals either.
- Lakers are a first round out with Russel as PG who'got badly exposed again this year.
- Dallas is not making the finals with Kyrie either.
Now, Boston, OKC or Denver who are startigng taller PGs are le favorites.
I contradict myself because I wouldn't be against Trae but I do'nt believe spurs are ringing with him also. it's jsut that Wemby is badly needing help and start to play meaningfull/PO games. But between the two, because of size, I'd take Dejounte.
Last edited by JPB; 1 Week Ago at 07:05 AM.
You're not contradicting yourself, you're just missing the point and creating some wrong narratives.
While it would obviously be better to get the next Magic or even Jokic, that's not going to happen.
We're one of the worst teams in the league and ther's a long way between current situation and even thinking about getting to the finals.
If Dillingham is a potential 22/8 guy who can score from anywhere, then we better get him.
Tony wasn't a positive defender and yet it was never an issue.
Knicks are really undersized on the perimeter and yet they're an elite defense. You talk about hobbled Embiid, but Randle isn't playing at all.
It doesn't matter who's the point guard on offense for Timberwolves, 6'0 Conley is still a positive defender, even at this age. And he was always good.
Denver has only two good defenders (KCP and Gordon) in their starting lineup and yet they look good as a team defensively.
Having a defensively questionable point guard isn't an issue, having no wing defenders and rim protection is.
Suns have one positive defender in their starting lineup and he got injured (Allen).
Bucks lost all of their perimeter defense and they're relying on Beverley in 2024, lmao.
Lakers also traded away KCP and Caruso, two of the best perimeter defenders in the league.
Mavs have looked surprisingly good because their three role players in the starting lineup are doing really well and Clippers have been trash.
If you ask me, four perimeter positions need to be filled wit two elite 3-d players (think Bruce or Danny), one elite playmaker/scorer and one wing scorer that's also solid on defense.
Current Knicks are a good example of how I see the ideal (realistic) roster around Wemby. Hart and OG as elite 3-D players, Brunson as the playmaking engine and then I guess you'd want someone better than DiVincenzo as the third option.
Add Wemby in there instead of Hartenstein and they're the favorites to win the East, even without Randle.
I was just going with the assumption that Spurs are in for a point guard.
I've got no clue what's their priority. I'd personally prefer wings.
He also had to score in the last minute where he had to create his shot. He then hit the game winner.
The problem in basketball has never been size, but defense and scoring ability. And this, at any position. This permanent desire in the NBA to favor tall PG is only of interest in one perspective: for equal value, it is assumed that a tall player will ultimately be more effective than a smaller one. A gamble that doesn't necessarily pay off in my opinion. Yes, if we ensure that all tall point guards are both good defensively and good shooters. However, this is far from being the case. It is better to have a PG defender with shooting skills. If you can improve your skill, you never improve your defensive abilities.
Defense is like size, you can't learn it. And it's better to have a small PG who defends than a big one who does nothing. A tall PG looks nice. In a draft, I can understand that we can favor size, but from a certain level, size is not at all the guarantee that a player can defend.
The French championship is known for often putting forward small PG, often Americans, in a particularly physical championship, we cannot say that this was detrimental to them on the European scene. Paris Basketball has two very small guards, but they win games and defend like madmen.
With this perspective, Tony Parker would never have started at Spurs and his defensive qualities have always been undervalued. This debate is also found in the preference between Dejounte Murray and Trae Young. What differentiates their defensive quality is not their size, but their willingness to defend and their defensive skills. And I remain convinced that what guides Spurs is not the size of a player, but his ability and his will to defend. No team can claim the le with more than two bad defenders on their roster. As good as Young or Doncic may be, what unites them is not their difference in size which makes sense for some to determine who defends, but rather their inability to defend and thus force the coach to fill the other places on the roster with strong defenders without whom no match can be won.
Or you might not (probability is you won't) and you lost another year of Wemby with two more rookies to develop on your team for years...Oh the Tank is definitely on for 2025 this class is going to be special we can legitimately get our second best player from this draft and possible two if the Basketball Gods are kind to us with Atlanta and Chicago picks. After 2025 I am off the Tanking and all for trading and getting a good veteran bench.
Do we really want to see Wemby and the spurs finish bottom 3 next year again with awful, painful to watch basketball? Victor is sure not gonna let that happen.
I nominate you to pay Young’s $60 million annual salary.
Neither was starting two non floor spacing centers (well, rarely). Different time.
The game now is target ball, where small, frail guards and led footed bigs are always prime hunting ground.
That doesn't mean you can't win with them though. Everything is contextual.
The Celtics, for example, who don't quite have an MVP player/elite play maker, probably can't afford a weak link.
The Spurs, who are likely to have the future best player in the league and maybe best defender ever, probably can.
Of course it'd be ideal if they didn't, but it's not as simple as many make it seem or seem to think.
Trae is making 43, 45, 48M the next 3 years and spurs players are getting paid anyway.
But if you prefer giving 48M to Vassel (29M) + Keldon (19M) instead. I don't.
That's why in the previous post I said the size of a point guard doesn't really matter because even the best defenders will get hunted by elite wings.
Knicks and Minnesota both have elite defenses with undersized point guards. Minnesota also has two bigs who were both supposed to be bad on the perimeter and yet it works.
Knicks have a 6'5 SF.
OKC would have no chance against either Nuggets or Wolves because Chet is too small. Even JV can score on him at will, it's just that the Pelicans are trash.
Agreed, but then again Wemby needs way more help on offense than on defense. As you said, we have an advantage because he can cover for one bad defender, but our current roster outside of Wemby is just garbage.The Celtics, for example, who don't quite have an MVP player/elite play maker, probably can't afford a weak link.
The Spurs, who are likely to have the future best player in the league and maybe best defender ever, probably can.
Of course it'd be ideal if they didn't, but it's not as simple as many make it seem or seem to think.
Devin is the only player who would get minutes on a legit playoff team. I'm not saying they can't improve, but it's just how things are right now.
Look everyone wants to win a NBA championship but if it was so easy every one would have one. One thing in this playoffs has shown is that even teams with All Star players if you don't have a deep team and other very good players you are not getting close to a ring. So I would rather suck another year and then be set for several years and would hate just to sign some decent vets and finish sub 500 every year.....
Some team will get the next Magic or Jokic.
We've already got Wemby.
Healthy Embiid was >>>> then Randle but ya, hobbled or not that was a complete meltdown by 76er offense at the end of todays pivotal Game 4.
Oubre and Harris are soo soft on D imo.
I'm down with wings that can defend the perimeter as well as score. Concur.
Yeah, but you have zero guarantees tanking another year will set you for several years. that's the whole point. Allow me to take your argument and say that if that was so easy, every tanking team would win a ship. It's easier to get proven talent than getting talent in the draft.
I mean, if you tells me tanking another year guarantee you 100% to contend in 3 years, sure that's a no brainer but it's not written you're getting Flagg or he's gonna be that good anyway... Spurs have been sucking and drafting pretty high for 3 years in a row and besides Wemby don't really have anything to show for it. Imagine addind a couple more meh rookies the next 2 years...
Tanking another year then adding some more rookies, plus the one(s) this year, you'('ll have to develop for the next 4 years doesn't guarantee you anything. Then what do you do with guys like Blake and Branham?
then last but not least, it's not just about the spurs or us fans, but anout Wemby and what he'd be OK with. WIll he be OK to tank next year, then spend the next 4 in the midlle of a bunch of youngsters trying to be developped by a 75 y.o coach who seems unphased with today's NBA? I guarantee you he's not. If SPurs do'nt make the POs next year, the countdown has started.
I was just thinking this myself. Do our draft picks get the Sochan treatment, or the Vassell/Primo treatment as rookies?
^ if Dillingham is given the starter's reigns, he'd be worth it at #1. I'd even go as far as Topic at number one if we were sure of Pop's intent to get him plenty of minutes, but I don't think he will be given the keys from the start and will likely be benched for the most minute mistakes (if the drafted player is a PG and is the primary backup). I don't trust Pop with developing our point guards since he has an "easy" out with Tre who will gladly take any minutes he's given considering his talent (not hating on tre, just stating facts).
Best case would be trading for Trae Young and getting a wing who can defend and shoot, though, imho.
Lakers started Shrouder in 2020
Miami had a Lowry as a starter and Gabe Vincent too
Warriors had Curry
Cleveland had Kyrie
Spurs had TP
Raptors had Lowry
Phoenix has CP3
Heat had Chalmers
In fact, it's harder to find teams that made it to the finals that didn't have a short PG on their roster than teams that did. The Spurs can make a finals with Dilly if he is a Maxey type of player. Wemby is our alpha and our best player. He covers up a lot of sins with defense and really like I've been saying/proving PG defense is extremely overrated. You can win a chip with a bad PG defender. Only 3 championship teams in the last 25 years have been good defenders at PG and I believe it's 5 in the last 35 years.
All of those guards could score in the NBA. Can Dilly?
He the bed on O and D against #14 seed Oakland Michigan in the NCAA tourney.
Hey it's only one game and he's 19. But is he NBA offense ready and if not how much longer is it going to take?
I put zero stock in the tournament. With that fraud of a coach and a completely new team, who gives a about KY losing in the first game. None of the top prospects did well in the tournament.
I think Dilly will score just fine. but I think he needs a mentor in Lowry, CP3, or Conley
I've posted it before but he was really the most effective player for UK other than Reaves on a team where Cal didn't prepare them at all and didn't even call his first time out until seconds were left in the game.
He was the only player who could relatively keep up with Gohlke (no, not Sheppard) and, when the game was on the balance hit a tough three with a minute left to go when they were four down. The next possession Sheppard slow walked it up the court and launched a wild deep three. Dillingham never saw the ball again.
Not blaming Sheppard, either, but overall this zombie story of the game gets repeated mindlessly. You're actually blaming the player who tried to do the most and was actually doing something.
Bravo on the tough trey.
That means otherwise he went 1-8 with 1-5 on treys.
This is the problem with Dillingham. If his shot isn't falling he doesn't do enough in the rest of his game to be impactful.
Castle is better because he will consistently positively impact the game in more areas.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
