RealGM

SA seems to be happy with Wemby at C and Vassell at sg. Everything else seems to be open (they have Keldon, Sochan and a few other prospects but nothing overwhelming).

I fell Risacher would be a perfect fit off of Wemby and next to Vassell (plus the whole Euro thing).
SA also needs a pg - but the draft is deep there so they should be able to get one at #4 (Topic, Dillingham, Castle, Sheppard, etc.).

Would WAS ship #2 for #8 and the protected 2025 firsts from CHA and CHI (see details below)? If not, what needs to be added - a bunch of seconds or what?

-2025 first round draft pick from Charlotte: Charlotte's 2025 1st round pick to San Antonio protected for selections 1-14; if this pick falls within its protected range and is therefore not conveyed, then Charlotte will instead convey its 2026 2nd round pick and 2027 2nd round draft pick to San Antonio.
-2025 first round draft pick from Chicago: Chicago's 1st round pick to San Antonio protected for selections 1-10 in 2025, 1-8 in 2026 and 1-8 in 2027; if Chicago has not conveyed a 1st round pick to San Antonio by 2027, then Chicago will instead convey its 2028 2nd round pick to San Antonio.
- With all the comments about not much difference between top 10 guys, does it work?

I just don't think Risacher is going to separate himself enough for SA to pay this price. As of right now I think there is a 65-70% he is there at 4 already, he is not a lock for the top half of the lottery right now.

2025 Charlotte protected 1-14? Might as well say they are getting 2 2nds. I think Washington demands #4 instead of #8.

[quote="Myth"]2025 Charlotte protected 1-14? Might as well say they are getting 2 2nds. I think Washington demands #4 instead of #8.[/quote]

True - but the CHI pick is not as protected and would be nice if it ends up at #11 next year or #9 one of the next two years. CHI might make the play-in but is probably not dropping under 14-17 range.
Figured that combined - or maybe just the CHI pick could be enough?

Xman wrote:

Myth wrote:2025 Charlotte protected 1-14? Might as well say they are getting 2 2nds. I think Washington demands #4 instead of #8.

True - but the CHI pick is not as protected and would be nice if it ends up at #11 next year or #9 one of the next two years. CHI might make the play-in but is probably not dropping under 14-17 range.
Figured that combined - or maybe just the CHI pick could be enough?

I just don’t think that Bulls pick (plus 2 likely 2nds) jumps them from 8 to 2. I do think it can jump them from 4 to 2.

[quote="Myth"][quote="Xman"][quote="Myth"]2025 Charlotte protected 1-14? Might as well say they are getting 2 2nds. I think Washington demands #4 instead of #8.[/quote]

True - but the CHI pick is not as protected and would be nice if it ends up at #11 next year or #9 one of the next two years. CHI might make the play-in but is probably not dropping under 14-17 range.
Figured that combined - or maybe just the CHI pick could be enough?[/quote]
I just don’t think that Bulls pick (plus 2 likely 2nds) jumps them from 8 to 2. I do think it can jump them from 4 to 2.[/quote]

That would still get them Risacher. With all the pgs, at #8 they could still probably get one of (Topic, Castle, Dillingham) (rumor of Topic injury might effect that though).

pg - one of Castle/Topic/Dillingham
sg - Vassell
sf - Risacher
pg - Sochan
c - Wemby
- all decent contracts (Vassell only one not one rookie deal) (along with four others on lower rookie deals). Lots of room for growth and a ton of picks still coming.

Would WAS take Clingan at four? Maybe at two?

I wouldn't drop that far for future picks with such limited upside. I mean the Charlotte one has basically no chance at even being a first and Chicago seems pot-committed to handing over a pick late lotto or worse.

I won't speak to the player like psman is but in terms of value in moving up Spurs are paying a minimal cost here. Unless your scouts just hate everyone, you almost have to just scoop up all the free value

Texas Chuck wrote:I wouldn't drop that far for future picks with such limited upside. I mean the Charlotte one has basically no chance at even being a first and Chicago seems pot-committed to handing over a pick late lotto or worse.

I won't speak to the player like psman is but in terms of value in moving up Spurs are paying a minimal cost here. Unless your scouts just hate everyone, you almost have to just scoop up all the free value

Yeah...this was just me speaking to the player, no problem with the cost if the Spurs really rank him that much higher and should be willing to pay even more. I just think teams boards are going to be so radically different that the value to trade up/down is going to be hard to figure out this year more than others.

I would be more than happy with Holland and Dillingham or a number of other combinations. This draft is "poor" in the sense that there isn't a consensus at who to pick at the top. Having two top-10 picks doubles the odds the Spurs snag one of the guys who actually ends up panning out and may even allow them to get two if things work out.

While the Spurs don't need to keep the Chicago and Charlotte firsts, I'm not keen to throw them away. The Charlotte pick can be incentive to get off a contract, and the Bulls pick is a solid first that can be moved for a legitimate player while preserving the unprotected picks. The time to bundle them would've been last year when 31 and these two firsts might've been able to get the Spurs a young PG prospect. But it worked out.

The Wizards would say no. Not enough incentive.

It really depends who the Wizards have on their board. With the unusual volatility of this draft, they might have 2 or 3 guys they rate pretty evenly at #2 in which case it might be worth taking the chance one of them drops. I'd trust our guys to make this call.

So nice to be able to say this even in theory after 40 years of not trusting them at all.

Washington is at beginning of rebuild. Draft assets should Trump all.

Texas Chuck wrote:I wouldn't drop that far for future picks with such limited upside. I mean the Charlotte one has basically no chance at even being a first and Chicago seems pot-committed to handing over a pick late lotto or worse.

I won't speak to the player like psman is but in terms of value in moving up Spurs are paying a minimal cost here. Unless your scouts just hate everyone, you almost have to just scoop up all the free value

Chicago's pick is very likely lottery, in drafts ('25 or '26) that are projected to be much better, you don't pay that price to jump from Dillingham/Sheppard/Holland to Risacher, whom you may take anyway at 4

psman2 wrote:I just don't think Risacher is going to separate himself enough for SA to pay this price. As of right now I think there is a 65-70% he is there at 4 already, he is not a lock for the top half of the lottery right now.

Pretty much only sensible take in the entire thread.

Myth wrote:2025 Charlotte protected 1-14? Might as well say they are getting 2 2nds. I think Washington demands #4 instead of #8.

It's 8 + Chicago's '25 (protected 10-8-8) + Charlotte's 25 (lottery protected). So you're likely talking 8 + 12 (in a better draft) + 2 SRPs... overpay to jump 6 spots in a weak draft. You do this for a Chet/Banchero in 22, a Mobley in 21, not a Risacher.

wemby wrote:

Myth wrote:2025 Charlotte protected 1-14? Might as well say they are getting 2 2nds. I think Washington demands #4 instead of #8.

It's 8 + Chicago's '25 (protected 10-8-8) + Charlotte's 25 (lottery protected). So you're likely talking 8 + 12 (in a better draft) + 2 SRPs... overpay to jump 6 spots in a weak draft. You do this for a Chet/Banchero in 22, a Mobley in 21, not a Risacher.

I understood the trade, I still don’t think the Bulls pick and those 2nds are enough to go from 8 to 2. I view it as an underpay.

Myth wrote:

wemby wrote:

Myth wrote:2025 Charlotte protected 1-14? Might as well say they are getting 2 2nds. I think Washington demands #4 instead of #8.

It's 8 + Chicago's '25 (protected 10-8-8) + Charlotte's 25 (lottery protected). So you're likely talking 8 + 12 (in a better draft) + 2 SRPs... overpay to jump 6 spots in a weak draft. You do this for a Chet/Banchero in 22, a Mobley in 21, not a Risacher.

I understood the trade, I still don’t think the Bulls pick and those 2nds are enough to go from 8 to 2. I view it as an underpay.

Let's put it this way: it's a better offer than 7+14 (Chicago pick in 25 projects to get you a much stronger player than 14 in this class). Would you do 7+14+2 2nds for 2?

wemby wrote:

Myth wrote:

wemby wrote:It's 8 + Chicago's '25 (protected 10-8-8) + Charlotte's 25 (lottery protected). So you're likely talking 8 + 12 (in a better draft) + 2 SRPs... overpay to jump 6 spots in a weak draft. You do this for a Chet/Banchero in 22, a Mobley in 21, not a Risacher.

I understood the trade, I still don’t think the Bulls pick and those 2nds are enough to go from 8 to 2. I view it as an underpay.

Let's put it this way: it's a better offer than 7+14 (Chicago pick in 25 projects to get you a much stronger player than 14 in this class). Would you do 7+14+2 2nds for 2?

Yes I would.

psman2 wrote:I just don't think Risacher is going to separate himself enough for SA to pay this price. As of right now I think there is a 65-70% he is there at 4 already, he is not a lock for the top half of the lottery right now.

That's a very small price, if they are interested in him, they pay that and even add on top of it and not look back.