Reply With Quote
If Spurs get 1, I’d imagine they’d trade back.
Winning 1st Pick is nice but not this year please, tbh.
- With Spurs history of #1 picks (Robinson, Duncan, Wembanyama), I can't imagine a name (no offense and not because of their names) Sarr, Risarcher, Dillingham will join that list.
- Spurs will pay a salary of 1st pick in a skillset (in paper) for Mid-First Round range in a decent draft class although it doesn't much make difference if the Spurs will pick between 2nd to 5th.
- Outside Spurs fans will have a narrative that the NBA is helping the Spurs and Wembanyama by securing a 1st Pick but in fact in a very weak draft class (much weaker in paper than 2020) and with no clear of 1st-3rd Pick in different Mock Draft.
Anyway, hoping that NBA will somehow lower the odds of the Spurs by not having back-to-back 1st Pick or won't allow them completely. I'm okay for them picking between 3rd to 6th but still hoping that they're looking to trade down instead or trade them to acquire a proven player esp. if Raptors pick conveys.
Thoughts?
If Spurs get 1, I’d imagine they’d trade back.
Yeah, pretty much. Those top salary slots get really nasty before long. Plus we have like six potential lottery picks coming up. Handling all this salary is going to be a massive issue before long.
No player in this draft is worth a top 4 pick. Controlling costs is going to become tremendously important. Letting other teams go crazy picking role-players like Sarr and Risacher isn't a bad thing.
And then... whoever goes number 1 will be burdened with impossible standards. "Alexandre Sarr, who was drafted number 1 overall in 2024, still has not lived up to expectations..."
I’m for getting greedy. It’s a good problem to get the number 1 pick. Plus playing with Wemby, like playing with any great players in the past, would rub off and make players work extra hard, play better. So Sarr or anyone would have better chance of living up to the standard. No comparison to Kwame playing with MJ who was at the twilight of his greatness. Having more assets to trade, etc. The rich just gets richer. Bring on #1
Here's to 6 & 7!!! GSG
if trading the #1 pick for an impactful player plus a pick in, say, the top 6 or 7 becomes a possibility, this might be the year to do it.
That would be rad, say for example WAS fell to #6 and wanted to trade #6 + Deni for #1. I'd do it in a heartbeat (though it really requires WAS be deeply in love with one of these prospects, because that seems like a very steep price to pay for #1 in a flat draft).
Other possibilities?
DET: #5 + Ivey for #1 + CHI25(?)
POR: #7 + Simons for #1 + CHI25 + CHA25 + some seconds (not sure what Simons true value is or how much POR values him going forward)
UTAH: #9 + Lauri for #1 + ATL27 + CHI25 + some other pick (pipe dream, not happening)
Unfortunately there aren't a lot of teams in the lottery with players that I think we'd want who wouldn't cost a fortune
Getting #1 feels high risk due to the high salary for the rookie and the lack of high level talent
All Ivey has proven is that he's not a good enough at getting to the rim to offset his outside shooting and poor defense, I would take him in a trade back with no pick added, or maybe throw in Keldon rather than the Chicago pick.
Simons I like but trade back + likely lottery pick is too much IMO.
Lauri one I'd do, if Utah knows he's on his way out they might consider it.
My best case scenario is Spurs get #1 and #7, and Washington or Memphis gets #2 so the Spurs can extract a first out of one of them to let them swap picks so one of them can take Sarr and then the Spurs still get the #1 guy on their own board while picking #2.
Salary for the #1 pick is pretty much the MLE, not a huge deal.
Tbh, I'd take Sarr.
Run a three man rotation for PF-C positions with Wemby, Sarr and Sochan.
Guaranteed 48 minutes of elite rim protection.
But everyone else would have to be a good shooter, meaning that Wesley and Sidy would have to go.
I don't think $12.6 million first year with team options on years #3 and #4 is steep at all, and that's the #1 pick. I don't know how you can freak out about that but act like Collins making $35 million over the next two years is no big deal.
While Sarr is taller, it's questionable he'll even be as good a rim-protector as Bassey (who is an elite shot blocker by the metrics). Sarr's offensive game might be about where Bassey's is too. If Bassey were healthy, could stay out of foul trouble, and were 3 inches taller at $2.5MM/year, I wouldn't want him starting and playing extended minutes next to Wemby either.
Sarr = Jalen Duren/Derek Lively. No thanks on this team.
I think Sarr would be a pretty good #4 or #5 pick most years but don't want him as anything other than maybe an asset to trade since I can't see how he'd ever fit next to Victor.
Bolded is the most important part, IMO. Sarr is a project on the offensive end. Many folks want to overlook that because he projects to an elite rim protector... but we have an elite rim protector on our bench already, and playing next to Vic was okay but not all that compelling either. Our best lineup was Victor surrounded 3 wings and a lead ball handler. I'd prefer to lean into that model while upgrading those pieces around him. Don't need to invest a Top 10 pick in a backup center (which would be Sarr's best role on this team).
You always want the earliest pick possible. The draft costs are controlled and not particularly high, and even if you're not in love with a prospect at the top, some over team probably is enough to give up some asset to move up and get pick their guy. Dallas got off Bertans last year moving down from 10 to 12, you should be able to get off Collins (plus, get a decent player) moving from 1 to 4, for example.
The lottery is in like 1,5 hours ?
I wouldn't want Sarr if this draft was any good, but everyone else looks so questionable and Sarr's floor seems to be the highest.
Elite rim protector who can also switch on the perimeter is very valuable these days.
While I agree that he wouldn't fit with Wemby, he'd still be really valuable and Spurs could easily flip him for someone else who fits better in a few years.
Meanwhile, I'd rather have him as Wemby's backup than have any of these perimeter players that can't defend or shoot. Or neither.
Our roster had many flaws this season, but by far the biggest one was that as soon as Wemby sat, it was layup line for every opponent.
Tomorrow before Knicks @Pacers.
Yeah these twin tower fantasies are laughable. They worked for us in 97-03 because it was basically Victor + Victor level talent in Tim and Dave. I definitely wouldn't have been gung ho about a Duncan + Smits or Robinson + Magloire pairing.
Tomorrow
Nah tomorrow
I just can’t imagine this years 1st holds enough value to get a respectable return. I think quite a few teams would prefer avoiding the money inside the top 3.
Well that and the game was played differently.
This is an offense first league now, where there's years of data among various combinations that proves that two center pairings handicap the offense individually for them and team wise.
Thing with Sarr on the defensive end, is that he's not just your typical rim protector, but that he's really light on his feet which, coupled with his length (7'1" with 7'5" wingspan) would make him a suitable candidate to guard the elite big forwards in the league, especially those that give Sochan problems because he's not long enough. A Wemby/Sarr combo would be scary on defense, plus he could play all of the non Wemby minutes at C.
On offense it's a different story, yes it's a bad fit in principle, but he's shown flashes of skill and coordination that make me believe that could change. Not a given by any means, but at the end of the day, we can do pretty much the same reasoning with just about every high lottery prospect, where there's a scenario where everything goes right and they would be great, and another where they never address their shortcomings and they flame out.
There are currently 17 users browsing this thread. (6 members and 11 guests)
Posting Permissions
