Reply With Quote
any particular reason why they would want to use cap space and not the second round exception? any benefits to doing so?
any particular reason why they would want to use cap space and not the second round exception? any benefits to doing so?
I don't know if the Spurs even had that exception available. If it doesn't create a solid hold like first-rounders do, it might've gone away as soon as it showed up.
The third year of the new exception has to be a team option instead of non guaranteed.
Honestly, I don’t think magic would be close to as good in todays nba as he was in the 80s. He’d likely still be a good player, even all star, but he’d not be a top 10 player ever with todays rules. He won’t be able to park his butt in the paint and wait for cutters as the new rules will not allow him to do so. He’d be crowded with two or three guys his height so he can’t see over them. He’d be left wide opened out in the three point line. He wouldn’t be able to run the fast breaks because teams defend fast breaks much better.
He will still have exceptional vision and he’d likely be a better shooter because the game demands it. But I’d doubt he would be a top ten player of all time because you can’t win five championships and make nine finals building around a player like that, let alone the cap wont allow a team to have magic, Kareem, worthy and a deep lineup like the lakers did. And magic is my favourite non spurs player of all time.
Besides, I’m not sure sidy will ever even be a homeless man’s magic.
lol, I get it it’s been a while. You need to go back and refresh your memory a bit.
https://youtu.be/prvjNFHSOj0
To this day there’s been nobody like Magic.
Magic’s ability to get where he wanted easily was his biggest benefit and ultimately his downfall…
If we going to put player's game back then in today's NBA, we have to put in account that those player can adapt in today's game esp. with those at ude and mentally.
Obviously back then, they're slow and stiff but doesn't mean that if they're in today's NBA is that they won't be able to adapt so basically it's like similar to inflated rate when it comes to money.
Maybe an example is Brook Lopez who came to the league not a 3PT shooter but worked on his game when the NBA is starting to change due to Curry's effect and he's now considered one of the best 3PT shooter big man in the current league.
Players now are really good when it comes to skill (especially offensively) compared back then but they're not mentally tough or good as before - to be fair this is an issue in today's society so this is another topic.
Tho I get your point but it's really hard and unfair to compare players in different era if we are going to compare it literally.
With the additional money given to pay his buyout, Spurs have spend $3.8M on Cissoko. They are quite high on him.
This money spend is another piece to try to understand Spurs move on draft night when they traded #33. The theory that his agent told teams not to pick him because he has a deal with another team (like Blazers did with Ruppert and Bucks with Chris Livingston) looks more solid. Spurs traded #33 because they knew Cissoko would still be there at #44.
Cissoko ability to be a good nba player will obviously depends on whether or not he can fix his jumpshot. Spurs have hired a new shooting coach (Jimmy Baron), we will see what he can do with him.
\
Man if cissoko can get a decent jumper...He will be a nice companion growing with wemby
I watch his highlights regularly. I have the entire 1985 finals series on tape and watch that once a few months or so. I watch the 80 playoff highlights and 87 and 88 playoff highlights all the time.
I have watched the video you posted at least a dozen times before and it addressed none of my points. The rules are totally different now vs then and magics main advantage in size is not as uncommon now as it was then. Can he adapt and excel? Sure. Lebron came in the league without an outside shot and now he’s a very good shooter. Magics defence was also very underrated as he does read the passing lanes extremely well, but the fact remains that teams can no longer be constructed like they were in the 80s due to cap rules and a large part of magics greatness was the lakers making nine finals and winning five of them.
True. Which itself highlights the lack of validity in the original point in how sidy will be effective despite not having an outside shot. Actually it’s even worse for Sidy because he doesn’t have any finishing ability now. I think he can improve because he seems like a hard worker but to say that he can contribute right now is highly doubtful.
doesn't make sense to compare players from different eras and type of BB... Would Magic play today, he would have grown up as a player in today's BB and his game would reflect that. He wouldn't play like a 80s player. He would probalby also focus more on defense, comparing to the 80s where he din't have to.
And the fact he could play 1 to 5, as an uber talented passing/creating, trip dub big who was unstopable on fast break would be his force today where the transition game is key and there's no defesne... I mean we have an MVP who just won the le as an uber talented passing/creating big... And Magic was actually more athletic than Jokic. Magic could grab a rebound and coast to coast his way to a lay up or a dime.
Last edited by JPB; 08-03-2023 at 07:11 AM.
Era comparisons are stupid. If Jokic played in the 80's he wouldn't have been a three point threat and people today would say that he couldn't play in the modern game. Oh... he's too slow defensively, look how out of shape he is, he'd get run off the floor, he would get killed in small ball lineups. It's bull . Great players are great in any era. Magic was a basketball savant. He was the smartest player I've ever seen. Magic would be an MVP candidate today or in any era. It's a dumb argument to begin with, but an even dumber one when talking about Magic in particular because the single most translatable skill in any era is basketball IQ.
Magic Johnson was 14-2 against the Spurs in the playoffs.
One thing people also forget is that great players tend to have great work ethic. That work ethic would allow them to adapt to any era.
You can just look at current existing players that fill the archetype. Look at Josh Giddey. He’s 20 years old, 6’8” and can’t shoot worth a . He’s not the point guard but more of a ball handling forward. And yet he had an incredible year with 17 pts, 8 rebs and 6 assists. Just face it, your point is completely bogus, absolute statements usually in fact are.
Yes, and as Mitch said as far as greatness goes, the most underrated factor by far is the brain. And that will translate across the eras.
Giddey shot 32.5% from 3 last year on 3 attempts a game, and shot 48% from the field overall. It's not great, but I wouldn't call that "can't shoot worth a ", especially when compared to Sidy, who shot 30% from the field and 17% from 3, ins summer league.
Also if you want to talk about absolute statements, I am not sure how you qualify statements as such "Sidy will be fine because Magic was fine 40 years ago in a totally different game", and "Giddey was fine last year despite being far superior in the one aspect Sidy has shown the biggest weakness is" as. Are those relative statements?
What about absolute statements in fact are? Is that completely bogus too? Really,m do you even think through things you write? Speaking of my point, which one is it? That Magic from the 80s would not be as dominant in today's game as he was in the 80s? I actually have little doubt. I don't see how a team can win 5 les and go to the finals 9 times in 12 years in today's cap situation, and a large part of any player's greatness was team success.
My point is simple, Sidy will struggle out of the gate, and would be difficult to play, especially on a team like the Spurs which is not blessed with strong outside shooting. Tre and Sochan, both fine players would are likely to start and/or play heavy minutes, are not the greatest shooters. I think Sochan will improve quite a bit on that front this year (just a hunch) but I am not seeing Durant 2.0 here, so Sidy, at best, will play spot or garbage minutes. It is best for him to hone his stills it the G-league, and work to improve his finishing. I would love for him to do so, because I do love the way he plays in how he passes and play d, but to overlook his huge gaping weakness in his finishing and just act like a cheerleader is rather over optimistic. If Sidy can be compared to Magic and Giddey, then all the GMs really dropped the ball allowing him to go mid second round. He should be a low lottery pick, at worst.
To address the Magic comments, the goal post changed, the idea is to say if 80s Magic will dominate like he did in today's game because you were comparing Magic to Sidy. My answer is no, he likely won't, because he can't shoot (but still leagues better than Sidy), but then now it is about how his work ethic will make him into at least a decent shooter which defeats the entire point of Sidy's weakness, which is he can't shoot. Somebody brought up Jokic, he could shoot, as well as pass with the best of them. There were some questions about his defence but I think it's overblown, he reads spacing exceptionally well (my point about Magic), and he is huge. I think Larry Bird will still be exceptional in today's league despite him being slow and all. he was slow in the 80s, and yet he reads the game ridiculously well, like Magic, but will he be as good as he was in the 80s? I doubt it. But if he grew up with all the training and everything then will he be as good as he was in the 80s? Possible, but again the team construction aspect would be interesting, as I can't see a team that can afford him, Parish, McHale, Dennis Johnson, and a strong bench. The cap just won't allow it.
This makes a lot of sense to me especially with the buyout component to it. I’m sure that scared people off the further he dropped. All told, still less than the cost of the final FRP in the draft.
I'm not sure exactly what your point is regarding Magic. Is it, "If we had a time machine and brought back Magic from 1987 would he still be as dominant a player in today's NBA?" Notwithstanding the salary cap stuff, I honestly think he would be. It might take him a minute to get accustomed to the style of play, but I could make an argument that he would be even better in today's pace and space open floor game where they don't allow hand checking on the perimeter. His numbers would be absolutely insane. And why do you think a 52% career FG shooter (85% from the line --- 90% over his last 3 seasons including one season where he led the league) can't shoot? Regarding the salary cap... all of that is relative to the compe ion as well. So Magic wouldn't have the same talent around him but his compe ion wouldn't either. Playing field gets leveled for everybody and as much as Magic (and Bird for that matter) had great teammates, I would argue that he elevated their games a lot more than they ever elevated his.
I didn’t say he can’t shoot first. Some guy used magic’s shooting to compare it to sidy.
As for my point, the 80s pace was insane fast. So I don’t see much change in that regard. Magic wasn’t overly impacted by hand checking because of his size and strength compared for shoe guarding him. He was neutralized with size multiple times in the playoffs and regular season. Players like Pippen Moncrief gave him some (and some is relative) trouble. They were rare in the 80s. Not so much today.
If he was to teleport to todays game then he would still be a nice player, but one who can win this much? Not likely. Winning is a huge part of a players legacy, it’s part of a larger narrative. What magic did in the 80s was insane and the reason for that was that the team was stacked. Sure magic was a huge reason they were stacked but there was immense talent. There are some players who are more suited to different styles and even the greats are the same.
A player not being able to shoot is a real problem. It's too easy to out-efficient a team that relies on twos -- even at-the-basket twos. Yes, great players warp rules around them, but if you dropped Magic or even Shaq in the modern game, they wouldn't have the same pull on the league than they would in their own times. Curry, Lillard and Harden bent the modern NBA, and it would be really hard for a guy who was a 19/5/11 guy to come in and redirect rules and styles to make up for the fact that it's way too easy for mid-tier players to keep up with his scoring. DMDR doesn't get the respect he deserves for being one of the best inside-the-arc perimeter players of his era, because the three is just so much more powerful and the league is far too scared to give that up. It's just too hard to tell how great player would do in eras they didn't build and without the benefit of the cache they earned.
What is much easier to tell is that there's negative reason to be talking about a player like Magic when considering Cissoko. This is why I keep talking about the Diaw comparison. No, this is not a superficial thing. Some people seem to be fundamentally misinterpreting what they were seeing on the floor, in my opinion. No, Sidy didn't show any type of primary play-making ability. Nothing he did should give anyone consideration that a team would be depending on him to run an offense -- no not even in garbage time or in the d-league. Being able to throw pretty passes is nice, but it's not special, and it's one of the least important things about being a play-maker. What Sidy showed was the potential to be a nice piece in an offense that is moving the ball. He can good-to-great, and that level of selflessness and IQ is worth something for sure. It will endear him to teammates, and it might increase the overall efficiency of an offense when he's on the floor -- provided he can be in situations where he is legit dangerous to score to the point that he can create the gaps in the defense his IQ and selfless nature lets him exploit. If his shot gets right, he'll be a useful rotation player. He'd have many more things that'd have to break right for him to be more than that. Otherwise, he's much closer of the projection list to, say, Joffery Lauvergne, who also flashed a talent for throwing spectacular look-ahead passes during the early part of his Spurs stint before he fell back to Earth and became the memeist Spurs pick this side of Jeff Ayres.
the reason i dont think the joffrey comparison is apt is because sidy also looks like he should be a plus defender. if you are just comparing their apparent passing skill, thats a different story, but then also less useful and a much more limited means of comparison.
There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 5 guests)
Posting Permissions
