RealGM

Looking at that Fox trade, Spurs spent 3 FRPs and 3-4 SRPs to make it work without using any of their good young players. I don't believe that move alone makes them contenders. Are they willing to make a follow up move with a player in a similar timeline and trade package? This is the most obvious offseason "star" trade IMO.

Spurs in Markkanen

Utah in Johnson, Barnes, #10, ATL 2027 FRP, SAS 2029 FRP + two SRPs

- San Antonio locks a young core with Fox, Castle, Vassell, Lauri, Wemby and still keeps depth with Sochan, tax-MLE, #15, #40, Champagnie, Wesley, Branham to compete.

- Utah gets to the final stage of their rebuilding with their own FRP, #10, #20, George, Williams, Hendricks, Kessler with good vets Sexton, Clarkson, Johnson, Barnes, Collins complimenting them.

Note: I understand Utah fans might want something extra or a bigger piece, but I don't believe Lauri holds that value in his new max contract.

I like the concept overall. Even if the Jazz ask for a bit more, the fit may be worth it to the Spurs.

I like it...I also like the idea that getting the right player is worth paying for...I wish ORL FO and fans got that

The thing with these proposals for the Spurs is, I don't think they're ready. People will say Lauri is still young (turns 28 in 3 months), but you probably get the best of his prime (as well as Fox) in the next couple of years and you have no guarantees from then on.

Also, this locks your team long term, with Fox and Lauri on max deals, Wemby on a supermax in a couple of years, and then you'd have to pay Castle. Spurs have already made the move they really needed in Fox. Spurs would have little flexibility and that's a risk I would be wary to take on, this isn't enough of a bargain for me to overlook that.

From this point on I'd like to see how the draft unfolds and how a long term coach does with this core (I don't think Pop returns and Mitch Johnson isn't the answer) before making big decisions. In short, this is the kind of deal that sounds better on paper than it proves to be in reality. I'd take a more conservative approach.

I'd do it. I think Wembys concerns make sense.

I think Markkanen is the wrong target. He was the hottest name for a while but I think that time has passed.

babyjax13 wrote:I'd do it. I think Wembys concerns make sense.

What concerns?

daoneandonly wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:I'd do it. I think Wembys concerns make sense.

What concerns?

That it the cost structure of Wemby/Lauri/Fox may not make sense for a small market team + the picks give them a foundation for future rotation players on cost-controlled contracts.

I could see Spurs getting Randle for much cheaper. Randles flaws are more than made up for by Wemby.

I like this alot actually... Utah probably wants 10 & 15 and not Johnson, but the premise makes sense!

Looks good, and without Randles pouting.

Too expensive, in my opinion (salary + assets to get him).. I like his teammate J. Collins better, above all I like the fit better, he gives them an inside presence, a good rebounder, he can play the backup 5 (a need for the Spurs) he would cost them a lot less assets and he is also expiring (they could extend him a lot cheaper I suppose).. If I am the Spurs I am keeping the 2 lottery picks this year.

babyjax13 wrote:

daoneandonly wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:I'd do it. I think Wembys concerns make sense.

What concerns?

That it the cost structure of Wemby/Lauri/Fox may not make sense for a small market team + the picks give them a foundation for future rotation players on cost-controlled contracts.

You have to take into account that these are not the 10+ years maximums. Wemby's supermax kicks in 2027 and it will start at 46 mil, Markkanen will be at 50 mil and Fox will be at 54 mil if he takes the maximum extension too. Assuming Castle and Vassell stick with them this starting five will cost 187 mil in 2027-28 and Spurs will still have 40 mil under the tax.

That's three full seasons - with Fox and Lauri in their prime - before Spurs actually have to think about money. And of course with full control of their FRPs, except a 2029 1st.

I like the premise -- keep buying to accelerate the growth of Wemby/the team -- but not the target or the cost.

The Spurs have their all-everything talent in the middle and now a credible lead guard, plus another promising guard in Castle. They've got Vassell as a solid, unspectacular two. They've even got some competent, big-ish forwards. They do not have a big, strong two-way wing who is up for the task of battling the league's best swingmen. They need to keep their powder dry for that opportunity and/or try to draft such a player, IMO.

Now, Lauri is a very good player who brings another dimension to the Spurs. There's definitely a price where he becomes a good acquisition, but I think this is too rich when the Spurs have bigger needs. In other words, any "nice to have" guys should not come at the expense of chasing a physical 3/4 type who, ideally, is a little better than Lauri at most things. No knock on him, but to me he's like almost good enough, but sub-elite, at a lot of things, and not close enough to be a great team's best forward.

^^note that I'm not assuming the Spurs can just "have" the sort of player I describe as their target. I know it's not the simple. But they should be considered among the favorites for anybody who shakes loose, and they'll need the goods to pounce.

At this price (late lottery current first, likely late lottery or teens future first, plus “stuff”), I think the Spurs should do this. Playing with better playmaking guards should make Lauri look near elite again. This also makes them a playoff lock next year, perhaps even home court in the first round, something they should be striving for.

If the worry is too many big contracts, deal with that later. As detailed above, I don’t think they’ll have problems during Markkanen and Fox’s deals if their bench continues to be mostly rookie contract guys (and perhaps ring chasers if it goes well).

And to address Tim’s post above — if there’s intel out there that they can get JJJ or someone like that, sure, that’d be better, but that seems highly unlikely.

They are still a lotto team. Is it a bit early to start making consolidation trades and building a “contender “
That said the trade seems fair value and makes some sense for both teams.
It really depends where they pick this year and what player that is though. That guy might be a better long term piece than Lauri.

Tim Lehrbach wrote:I like the premise -- keep buying to accelerate the growth of Wemby/the team -- but not the target or the cost.

The Spurs have their all-everything talent in the middle and now a credible lead guard, plus another promising guard in Castle. They've got Vassell as a solid, unspectacular two. They've even got some competent, big-ish forwards. They do not have a big, strong two-way wing who is up for the task of battling the league's best swingmen. They need to keep their powder dry for that opportunity and/or try to draft such a player, IMO.

Now, Lauri is a very good player who brings another dimension to the Spurs. There's definitely a price where he becomes a good acquisition, but I think this is too rich when the Spurs have bigger needs. In other words, any "nice to have" guys should not come at the expense of chasing a physical 3/4 type who, ideally, is a little better than Lauri at most things. No knock on him, but to me he's like almost good enough, but sub-elite, at a lot of things, and not close enough to be a great team's best forward.

I think they could have C. Johnson for example at practically half cost/salary

brackdan70 wrote:They are still a lotto team. Is it a bit early to start making consolidation trades and building a “contender “
That said the trade seems fair value and makes some sense for both teams.
It really depends where they pick this year and what player that is though. That guy might be a better long term piece than Lauri.

Right, they aren't great currently and I'm very curious where their offense goes without Chris Paul.

That said I like the idea and I think it hasn't been mentioned the sort of multiplicative effects of adding really long guys together.

I would pass as a Jazz fan. Not really interested in more #10-#20 picks. We get enough already and we have more on the way the next few years.