RealGM

Fox/Huerter for Castle/Johnson/Collins/2025 pick

Yes, Spurs have to give up Castle…that’s the cost. But SA ends up with the best player and 3/5th of a starting line up that two seasons ago finished 3rd in the West (Fox/Huerter/Barnes).

Sac resets with Castle and the fists, plus they have a lot of guard talent to sustain while Castle grows into his role. Johnston helps on the wing. Collins is the backup 5 man.

Spurs take a step forward, Kings stay relevant and have upside potential.

seems really light for Sacramento

Godaddycurse wrote:seems really light for Sacramento

Yeah I'm not sure about the Spurs only adding 1 pick here. Start with getting the swap back in 2031. Then add 2 more firsts.

I think its more likely to be vassell + sochan instead of castle + Johnson. But I'd also ask for our swap back and maybe another 1st. I think kings want to compete now and not wait for castle. And spurs want to keep their guy.

Monk/Carter
Vassell/Keon
Derozan/
Keegan/Sochan
Sabonis/Lyles/Collins

Fox/cp3
Castle/Huerter
Champagnie/keldon
Barnes
Wemby/Len

My ideal would be vassell/Castle/Collins + our pick back. Anything on top is nice. Move derozan to 6th man.

Monk/Carter
Castle/Keon
Vassell/Derozan
Keegan/Lyles
Sabonis/Collins

I'd keep Wemby and Castle off the table. Spurs have plenty of other assets. If not, then I'll roll the dice and wait. Not moving Castle.

SNPA wrote:But SA ends up with the best player and 3/5th of a starting line up that two seasons ago finished 3rd in the West (Fox/Huerter/Barnes).

Including a player the Spurs already have and another negative contract and presenting that as a positive is outright gaslighting.

LightTheBeam wrote:I think its more likely to be vassell + sochan instead of castle + Johnson. But I'd also ask for our swap back and maybe another 1st. I think kings want to compete now and not wait for castle. And spurs want to keep their guy.

I'm assuming if this happens that's the framework, probably Sochan (both him and Castle played well on their own but not together since they both struggle shooting) and Vassell (with Fox and Castle he'd be expendable) plus the swap extinguished and pick/s (depending on which). If the Rockets come out blazing with a great offer, so be it. But given Fox future contract (max/super max) that's about as far as I'd go.

wemby wrote:

LightTheBeam wrote:I think its more likely to be vassell + sochan instead of castle + Johnson. But I'd also ask for our swap back and maybe another 1st. I think kings want to compete now and not wait for castle. And spurs want to keep their guy.

I'm assuming if this happens that's the framework, probably Sochan (both him and Castle played well on their own but not together since they both struggle shooting) and Vassell (with Fox and Castle he'd be expendable) plus the swap extinguished and pick/s (depending on which). If the Rockets come out blazing with a great offer, so be it. But given Fox future contract (max/super max) that's about as far as I'd go.

A Vassell based deal means the Spurs 2025 first unprotected, plus at least one more solid first in either 25 or 26. Sac should ask for Champ too.

SNPA wrote:

wemby wrote:

LightTheBeam wrote:I think its more likely to be vassell + sochan instead of castle + Johnson. But I'd also ask for our swap back and maybe another 1st. I think kings want to compete now and not wait for castle. And spurs want to keep their guy.

I'm assuming if this happens that's the framework, probably Sochan (both him and Castle played well on their own but not together since they both struggle shooting) and Vassell (with Fox and Castle he'd be expendable) plus the swap extinguished and pick/s (depending on which). If the Rockets come out blazing with a great offer, so be it. But given Fox future contract (max/super max) that's about as far as I'd go.

A Vassell based deal means the Spurs 2025 first unprotected, plus at least one more solid first in either 25 or 26. Sac should ask for Champ too.

I wouldn't move that pick until I know where it lands. It's going to be good either way, but if it's top 4 then forget it, not moving it by any means. So we'd be talking about a summer trade.

wemby wrote:

SNPA wrote:

wemby wrote:I'm assuming if this happens that's the framework, probably Sochan (both him and Castle played well on their own but not together since they both struggle shooting) and Vassell (with Fox and Castle he'd be expendable) plus the swap extinguished and pick/s (depending on which). If the Rockets come out blazing with a great offer, so be it. But given Fox future contract (max/super max) that's about as far as I'd go.

A Vassell based deal means the Spurs 2025 first unprotected, plus at least one more solid first in either 25 or 26. Sac should ask for Champ too.

I wouldn't move that pick until I know where it lands. It's going to be good either way, but if it's top 4 then forget it, not moving it by any means. So we'd be talking about a summer trade.

So Fox but no top assets in return? Not generally how it works.

SNPA wrote:

wemby wrote:

SNPA wrote:A Vassell based deal means the Spurs 2025 first unprotected, plus at least one more solid first in either 25 or 26. Sac should ask for Champ too.

I wouldn't move that pick until I know where it lands. It's going to be good either way, but if it's top 4 then forget it, not moving it by any means. So we'd be talking about a summer trade.

So Fox but no top assets in return? Not generally how it works.

I wouldn't move a top 3 pick in this draft not even outirght for Fox, if that tells you anything. Include future unprotected firsts if you want (like Cavs did for Mitchell who is a better player), but not Spurs own 25 unprotected.

wemby wrote:

SNPA wrote:

wemby wrote:I wouldn't move that pick until I know where it lands. It's going to be good either way, but if it's top 4 then forget it, not moving it by any means. So we'd be talking about a summer trade.

So Fox but no top assets in return? Not generally how it works.

I wouldn't move a top 3 pick in this draft not even outirght for Fox, if that tells you anything.

It tells that my post is right.

Vassell is the fourth best asset on the Spurs currently. Wemby/Castle/25 First

How can a GM, especially one in Monte’s shoes, trade Fox and not get any of their top three assets that all fit with his team? Answer is…he can’t. Since obviously Wemby isn’t included it leaves Castle and that pick. Sac would have to get at least one, they should start by asking for both.

SNPA wrote:

wemby wrote:

SNPA wrote:So Fox but no top assets in return? Not generally how it works.

I wouldn't move a top 3 pick in this draft not even outirght for Fox, if that tells you anything.

It tells that my post is right.

Vassell is the fourth best asset on the Spurs currently. Wemby/Castle/25 First

How can a GM, especially one in Monte’s shoes, trade Fox and not get any of their top three assets that all fit with his team? Answer is…he can’t. Since obviously Wemby isn’t included it leaves Castle and that pick. Sac would have to get at least one, they should start by asking for both.

That has nothing to do with anything. When the Cavs traded for Mitchell, did they move a top 3 asset? no, they kept Mobley, Garland and Allen (Cavs Lauri wasn't Jazz Lauri). When the TWolves traded for Gobert, did they move a top 3 asset? no, they kept Ant, KAT and McDaniels (it was a deal breaker). What assets the acquiring team has is irrelevant, you need fair value, if the acquiring team can provide that through other means it shouldn't matter what else they have.

To be clear, Spurs should definitely put a competitive offer on the table (Vassell, Sochan, plus 2/3 unprotected firsts is competitive IMO) but those 3 are where I'd draw the line. A summer deal where the chips have already fallen would be easier... if that pick is, say, 10th, then I'd have no problem giving it up. But not unprotected right now.

wemby wrote:

SNPA wrote:

wemby wrote:I wouldn't move a top 3 pick in this draft not even outirght for Fox, if that tells you anything.

It tells that my post is right.

Vassell is the fourth best asset on the Spurs currently. Wemby/Castle/25 First

How can a GM, especially one in Monte’s shoes, trade Fox and not get any of their top three assets that all fit with his team? Answer is…he can’t. Since obviously Wemby isn’t included it leaves Castle and that pick. Sac would have to get at least one, they should start by asking for both.

That has nothing to do with anything. When the Cavs traded for Mitchell, did they move a top 3 asset? no, they kept Mobley, Garland and Allen (Cavs Lauri wasn't Jazz Lauri). When the TWolves traded for Gobert, did they move a top 3 asset? no, they kept Ant, KAT and McDaniels (it was a deal breaker). What assets the acquiring team has is irrelevant, you need fair value. If there's an offer that can provide that through other means, Spurs should put a competitive offer (Vassell, Sochan, plus 2/3 firsts is competitive IMO) but those 3 are where I'd draw the line.

It’s a fair offer. Nothing offensive about it. But, it doesn’t work that well for Sac. It lacks the immediate upside potential. Vassell is good but he isn’t a piece you build around. Sac would be looking for that piece that they can claim is core going forward. Monte would need that instantly but certainly no later than the draft. He has to have a shinny object for people to put hope behind.

SNPA wrote:It’s a fair offer. Nothing offensive about it. But, it doesn’t work that well for Sac. It lacks the immediate upside potential. Vassell is good but he isn’t a piece you build around. Sac would be looking for that piece that they can claim is core going forward. Monte would need that instantly but certainly no later than the draft. He has to have a shinny object for people to put hope behind.

Vassell is 24 he's plenty young, but the upside pick is Sochan who is a versatile forward who's only 21 (more than a year younger than Devin Carter, for instance) with tremendous defensive upside and can legit guard 1-4 (has done an excellent job on the likes of SGA, Luka, Ant, Brunson, etc), rebounds well and does the dirty work, this season he has improved playing off of others but he's not a shooting threat so spacing doesn't work well with Castle. However if you slot him next to DDR, Keegan Murray, Sabonis playmaking, that could work very well for him. Problem on the Spurs is they took too many non shooters and it just so happens right now they have another one who has even higher upside in Castle.

Again, the basic framework for me would be:
Vassell + Sochan + pick/s for Fox
That could also include a few variants:
Include Collins and Huerter, both almost identical contracts in both money and length that would fit better on the other team (would provide Spurs a replacement for Vassell and Kings another big body upfront).
Another possible inclusion could be Tre Jones for Trey Lyles, here Kings get a very good young backup PG on an expiring deal that would not have room on the Spurs with Fox and CP3 on the team, they can evaluate and have his Bird rights if they like him. He's actually very competent but not better than Fox/CP3 obviously and Spurs have bigger needs,
Lastly if Kings would like to take a look at any of Branham/Wesley/Cissoko in exchange for matching filler, I'd also be willing to include that.

All in all, I believe that basic framework would give the Kings a lot of options that Spurs could afford, to pick the package they like most... just not one that requires the Spurs part with the few untouchables they have.

wemby wrote:

SNPA wrote:

wemby wrote:I wouldn't move a top 3 pick in this draft not even outirght for Fox, if that tells you anything.

It tells that my post is right.

Vassell is the fourth best asset on the Spurs currently. Wemby/Castle/25 First

How can a GM, especially one in Monte’s shoes, trade Fox and not get any of their top three assets that all fit with his team? Answer is…he can’t. Since obviously Wemby isn’t included it leaves Castle and that pick. Sac would have to get at least one, they should start by asking for both.

That has nothing to do with anything. When the Cavs traded for Mitchell, did they move a top 3 asset? no, they kept Mobley, Garland and Allen (Cavs Lauri wasn't Jazz Lauri). When the TWolves traded for Gobert, did they move a top 3 asset? no, they kept Ant, KAT and McDaniels (it was a deal breaker). What assets the acquiring team has is irrelevant, you need fair value, if the acquiring team can provide that through other means it shouldn't matter what else they have.

To be clear, Spurs should definitely put a competitive offer on the table (Vassell, Sochan, plus 2/3 unprotected firsts is competitive IMO) but those 3 are where I'd draw the line. A summer deal where the chips have already fallen would be easier... if that pick is, say, 10th, then I'd have no problem giving it up. But not unprotected right now.

The difference here is that presumably Sacramento isn't tearing it down to the studs. Team needs matter too.

If they go full fire sale? You take what picks are there and don't worry as much about players. But I doubt they do that right now. If they're still trying to compete they need someone better than Vassell or Sochan to highlight the deal (nothing against those guys, they're good).

Andre Roberstan wrote:

wemby wrote:

SNPA wrote:It tells that my post is right.

Vassell is the fourth best asset on the Spurs currently. Wemby/Castle/25 First

How can a GM, especially one in Monte’s shoes, trade Fox and not get any of their top three assets that all fit with his team? Answer is…he can’t. Since obviously Wemby isn’t included it leaves Castle and that pick. Sac would have to get at least one, they should start by asking for both.

That has nothing to do with anything. When the Cavs traded for Mitchell, did they move a top 3 asset? no, they kept Mobley, Garland and Allen (Cavs Lauri wasn't Jazz Lauri). When the TWolves traded for Gobert, did they move a top 3 asset? no, they kept Ant, KAT and McDaniels (it was a deal breaker). What assets the acquiring team has is irrelevant, you need fair value, if the acquiring team can provide that through other means it shouldn't matter what else they have.

To be clear, Spurs should definitely put a competitive offer on the table (Vassell, Sochan, plus 2/3 unprotected firsts is competitive IMO) but those 3 are where I'd draw the line. A summer deal where the chips have already fallen would be easier... if that pick is, say, 10th, then I'd have no problem giving it up. But not unprotected right now.

The difference here is that presumably Sacramento isn't tearing it down to the studs. Team needs matter too.

If they go full fire sale? You take what picks are there and don't worry as much about players. But I doubt they do that right now. If they're still trying to compete they need someone better than Vassell or Sochan to highlight the deal (nothing against those guys, they're good).

This pretty much sums it up.

Unless the central piece coming back is an impact guy at a position of need - secondaries and picks can be debated but baseline is a rotational YOUNG player and an immediate ‘25 first ideally unprotected but settle for top one and unprotected after plus two future unprotected.

We are in win now mode. So if we are trading out one of our two best players, it’s highest bidder and this type of package starts the bidding.

Honestly there will be other bidders if he was really in the market. So it is pony up or no deal.

SNPA wrote:

wemby wrote:

SNPA wrote:So Fox but no top assets in return? Not generally how it works.

I wouldn't move a top 3 pick in this draft not even outirght for Fox, if that tells you anything.

It tells that my post is right.

Vassell is the fourth best asset on the Spurs currently. Wemby/Castle/25 First

How can a GM, especially one in Monte’s shoes, trade Fox and not get any of their top three assets that all fit with his team? Answer is…he can’t. Since obviously Wemby isn’t included it leaves Castle and that pick. Sac would have to get at least one, they should start by asking for both.

If ou're moving off of Fox. You create a biding war. Houston, Philly, Orlando, SA, GSW, LAL, LAC, DET, Miami, and Chicago would all have a bunch of interest.

Someone will .pay a Kings ransom here. Too much demand. Not enough supply of all star caiber guards available.

wemby wrote:

LightTheBeam wrote:I think its more likely to be vassell + sochan instead of castle + Johnson. But I'd also ask for our swap back and maybe another 1st. I think kings want to compete now and not wait for castle. And spurs want to keep their guy.

I'm assuming if this happens that's the framework, probably Sochan (both him and Castle played well on their own but not together since they both struggle shooting) and Vassell (with Fox and Castle he'd be expendable) plus the swap extinguished and pick/s (depending on which). If the Rockets come out blazing with a great offer, so be it. But given Fox future contract (max/super max) that's about as far as I'd go.

The rockets fans I've heard say Reed, jabari, fvv, picks. That does nothing to get me excited. I'd much rather have vassell and sochan. Also if we are going to move fox I'd like to bless him with wemby. Guy got us out of the mud. He and wemby could win titles together.

Beam Me Up Foxy wrote:If ou're moving off of Fox. You create a biding war. Houston, Philly, Orlando, SA, GSW, LAL, LAC, DET, Miami, and Chicago would all have a bunch of interest.

Someone will .pay a Kings ransom here. Too much demand. Not enough supply of all star caiber guards available.

One small detail you forget to mention: Fox is under contract one more season beyond this one. That means two things: 1) Kings are under a very real risk of losing him for nothing if they overplay their hand, and 2) no one is going to put a big offer for him unless he gives them assurances he'll extend/re-sign

Also, most those teams can't put together a comparable offer to what I just laid out. What would the Heat, Clippers, 76ers, Bulls have to offer in the first place? Do you really see Fox re-signing in Detroit?

Only teams I could see willing to enter a bidding war with enough ammo and Fox's blessing are the Rockets and the Spurs. If the Rockets go crazy with an offer beyond what I laid out (definitely a possibility), good for them, let them have Fox and pursue someone else on the trade market / free agency.

I don't believe the Kings are in a pinch to trade Fox, Sacramento has incredible backcourt depth and isn't in cap hell. Fox is holding out for the money which is understandable so whoever trades for him would be doing so with their checkbook ready. If you want a PG of Fox's caliber it's going to sting a little.