RealGM

Shooting addressed:

Solid signing for terms, fit, need. He's 29, 6'7", SF/PF, hits 3s

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mcderdo01.html

not a bad signing, still gotta see what we do with our FAs but if we don't get anyone else and let DD and Gay walk we'll probably be near the bottom next season

Cool:

WHAT ARE WE DOING???????

imagump1313 wrote:WHAT ARE WE DOING???????

Addressing a much needed team need - spacing and shooting that comes at younger and cheaper than Rudy but with better efficiency.

Bring Wright said we needed shooting and size, and that's exactly what we're taking care of.

GREY 1769 wrote:

imagump1313 wrote:WHAT ARE WE DOING???????

Addressing a much needed team need - spacing and shooting that comes at younger and cheaper than Rudy but with better efficiency.

Bring Wright said we needed shooting and size, and that's exactly what we're taking care of.

We just spent 20 million more than the Pacers paid him and we are going to get less performance than what they got. Who were we bidding against? Denver? Denver is in a position to over pay for a one dementional shooter who cant play defense. Not us.

And now we sign the worst big free agent out there in Collins.

We are on the 30 win a year treadmill now. Congrats Spurs!

imagump1313 wrote:

GREY 1769 wrote:

imagump1313 wrote:WHAT ARE WE DOING???????

Addressing a much needed team need - spacing and shooting that comes at younger and cheaper than Rudy but with better efficiency.

Bring Wright said we needed shooting and size, and that's exactly what we're taking care of.

We just spent 20 million more than the Pacers paid him and we are going to get less performance than what they got. Who were we bidding against? Denver? Denver is in a position to over pay for a one dementional shooter who cant play defense. Not us.

And now we sign the worst big free agent out there in Collins.

We are on the 30 win a year treadmill now. Congrats Spurs!

Shooters are getting paid right now. The comparison isn't what the Pacers gave him, it's what the going rate is NOW in THIS FA. Look what the Heat just gave to Duncan Robinson - $90M/5yrs!

How do you know we'll get less out of McD than what Pacers got when WE need to take and make more 3s? He's exactly what we need!

Collins we were rumoured to have interest in and it's only costing $7M. Not a huge investment for the upside, leaves us with tons of cap space for a max contract, fills a big need IF he can regain some health, and we still have Drew and Dieng. We're betting on the upside, with not a huge financial investment if it doesn't work out.

GREY 1769 wrote:Collins we were rumoured to have interest in and it's only costing $7M. Not a huge investment for the upside, leaves us with tons of cap space for a max contract, fills a big need IF he can regain some health, and we still have Drew and Dieng. We're betting on the upside, with not a huge financial investment if it doesn't work out.

So we are relying on Eubanks and Dieng? Sounds like a 30 win team to me

I'm not thrilled with Collins signing but its not a horrible deal. We'll see how you feel 15 games into next season when he is out with an injury for 6 months

imagump1313 wrote:

GREY 1769 wrote:Collins we were rumoured to have interest in and it's only costing $7M. Not a huge investment for the upside, leaves us with tons of cap space for a max contract, fills a big need IF he can regain some health, and we still have Drew and Dieng. We're betting on the upside, with not a huge financial investment if it doesn't work out.

So we are relying on Eubanks and Dieng? Sounds like a 30 win team to me

I'm not thrilled with Collins signing but its not a horrible deal. We'll see how you feel 15 games into next season when he is out with an injury for 6 months

You ignored the whole point about adding Doug. It's a very good and needed addition to the team who plays 2-3-4.

As for Collins, yes, a risk for a small price we can afford. Don't know what else we have in the pipe line, but we got better today.

GREY 1769 wrote:

imagump1313 wrote:

GREY 1769 wrote:Collins we were rumoured to have interest in and it's only costing $7M. Not a huge investment for the upside, leaves us with tons of cap space for a max contract, fills a big need IF he can regain some health, and we still have Drew and Dieng. We're betting on the upside, with not a huge financial investment if it doesn't work out.

So we are relying on Eubanks and Dieng? Sounds like a 30 win team to me

I'm not thrilled with Collins signing but its not a horrible deal. We'll see how you feel 15 games into next season when he is out with an injury for 6 months

You ignored the whole point about adding Doug. It's a very good and needed addition to the team who plays 2-3-4.

As for Collins, yes, a risk for a small price we can afford. Don't know what else we have in the pipe line, but we got better today.

Adding someone like McDermott you could have done way cheaper and way younger. If he was a more versatile player and a better defender and 5 tears younger I might have been ok with 42 million. Its a waste IMO. He is a non playoff team cap filler. Has been his whole career.
We need someone who can start and play meaningful minutes. He is just a replacement for Mills.

imagump1313 wrote:

GREY 1769 wrote:

imagump1313 wrote:
So we are relying on Eubanks and Dieng? Sounds like a 30 win team to me

I'm not thrilled with Collins signing but its not a horrible deal. We'll see how you feel 15 games into next season when he is out with an injury for 6 months

You ignored the whole point about adding Doug. It's a very good and needed addition to the team who plays 2-3-4.

As for Collins, yes, a risk for a small price we can afford. Don't know what else we have in the pipe line, but we got better today.

Adding someone like McDermott you could have done way cheaper and way younger. If he was a more versatile player and a better defender and 5 tears younger I might have been ok with 42 million. Its a waste IMO. He is a non playoff team cap filler. Has been his whole career.
We need someone who can start and play meaningful minutes. He is just a replacement for Mills.

This is the youngest team in the league. We just drafted sharpshooter Joe for whom Doug will be a good vet. And McD isn't a Patty replacement but a Rudy one. He cost LESS than Rudy and shot it BETTER.

Who was UFA that is younger and cheaper when shooters are at a premium ie/ Joe Harris - $20M/yr, Duncan Robinson - 5 years/$90M, even Bertans - $80M! This is a short contract - purposefully 3 years for both Doug and Zach, and the value aligns perfectly with projections:

GREY 1769 wrote:

imagump1313 wrote:

GREY 1769 wrote:You ignored the whole point about adding Doug. It's a very good and needed addition to the team who plays 2-3-4.

As for Collins, yes, a risk for a small price we can afford. Don't know what else we have in the pipe line, but we got better today.

Adding someone like McDermott you could have done way cheaper and way younger. If he was a more versatile player and a better defender and 5 tears younger I might have been ok with 42 million. Its a waste IMO. He is a non playoff team cap filler. Has been his whole career.
We need someone who can start and play meaningful minutes. He is just a replacement for Mills.

This is the youngest team in the league. We just drafted sharpshooter Joe for whom Doug will be a good vet. And McD isn't a Patty replacement but a Rudy one. He cost LESS than Rudy and shot it BETTER.

Who was UFA that is younger and cheaper when shooters are at a premium ie/ Joe Harris - $20M/yr, Duncan Robinson - 5 years/$90M, even Bertans - $80M! This is a short contract - purposefully 3 years for both Doug and Zach, and the value aligns perfectly with projections:

Read on Twitter

No one is going to offer Gay anything close to 3 years 42 million. I would rather have Gay back even at his age. If he doesn't go to LA for next to nothing we could resign him for next to nothing. The only thing McDermott does better than Gay is shoot uncontested set shots better. Gay is better at everything else basketball wise.

We just drafted a shooter, younger and much cheaper. We didn't need to overpay for one in FA. What is McDermott going to do? Teach the kid how to shoot? I thought thats what we drafted him for?

imagump1313 wrote:

GREY 1769 wrote:

imagump1313 wrote:
Adding someone like McDermott you could have done way cheaper and way younger. If he was a more versatile player and a better defender and 5 tears younger I might have been ok with 42 million. Its a waste IMO. He is a non playoff team cap filler. Has been his whole career.
We need someone who can start and play meaningful minutes. He is just a replacement for Mills.

This is the youngest team in the league. We just drafted sharpshooter Joe for whom Doug will be a good vet. And McD isn't a Patty replacement but a Rudy one. He cost LESS than Rudy and shot it BETTER.

Who was UFA that is younger and cheaper when shooters are at a premium ie/ Joe Harris - $20M/yr, Duncan Robinson - 5 years/$90M, even Bertans - $80M! This is a short contract - purposefully 3 years for both Doug and Zach, and the value aligns perfectly with projections:

Read on Twitter

No one is going to offer Gay anything close to 3 years 42 million. I would rather have Gay back even at his age. If he doesn't go to LA for next to nothing we could resign him for next to nothing. The only thing McDermott does better than Gay is shoot uncontested set shots better. Gay is better at everything else basketball wise.

We just drafted a shooter, younger and much cheaper. We didn't need to overpay for one in FA. What is McDermott going to do? Teach the kid how to shoot? I thought thats what we drafted him for?

But you said we could get someone cheaper and younger - who? The market is what it is as I've shown with examples. Of course no one is going to offer Rudy that. But as I've also shown, McD's contract aligns exactly with his market value, so whatever anyone thinks of the numbers, they're not exorbitant for what he provides. And what he provides we were in desperate need of. Rudy was the back up 4 for us, a role I think that now goes to Luka.

Doug McD played mostly 3, with some 2 and 4. He doesn't need the ball as long in his hands, is good moving off ball, and great at shooting off screens, and a capable driver. So less ISO play, move movement, more and better shooting on a short, reasonable contract.

And vet presence is invaluable for young rosters. That's not debatable. It goes way beyond shooting.

We wanted shooting, spacing, pace. We can orchestrate a far simpler scoring with him in various line-ups. I think this is an awesome signing.

GREY 1769 wrote:But you said we could get someone cheaper and younger - who? The market is what it is as I've shown with examples. Of course no one is going to offer Rudy that. But as I've also shown, McD's contract aligns exactly with his market value, so whatever anyone thinks of the numbers, they're not exorbitant for what he provides. And what he provides we were in desperate need of. Rudy was the back up 4 for us, a role I think that now goes to Luka.

Doug McD played mostly 3, with some 2 and 4. He doesn't need the ball as long in his hands, is good moving off ball, and great at shooting off screens, and a capable driver. So less ISO play, move movement, more and better shooting on a short, reasonable contract.

And vet presence is invaluable for young rosters. That's not debatable. It goes way beyond shooting.

We wanted shooting, spacing, pace. We can orchestrate a far simpler scoring with him in various line-ups. I think this is an awesome signing.

Like I said, we just drafted the same player as McDermott. Younger and much cheaper. By the time we are good again McDermott will be long gone. The vet thing is overblown. Its just basketball. Either you can play or you cant. Certain vets, yes. They can have an impact. But just any guy in the league isn't going to mentor players just because they hung around a couple years.

Duncan, Parker, Ginoibli, Robinson, Sean Elliot, Matt Bonner ...etc are around this team all the time if you want veteran input.

imagump1313 wrote:

GREY 1769 wrote:But you said we could get someone cheaper and younger - who? The market is what it is as I've shown with examples. Of course no one is going to offer Rudy that. But as I've also shown, McD's contract aligns exactly with his market value, so whatever anyone thinks of the numbers, they're not exorbitant for what he provides. And what he provides we were in desperate need of. Rudy was the back up 4 for us, a role I think that now goes to Luka.

Doug McD played mostly 3, with some 2 and 4. He doesn't need the ball as long in his hands, is good moving off ball, and great at shooting off screens, and a capable driver. So less ISO play, move movement, more and better shooting on a short, reasonable contract.

And vet presence is invaluable for young rosters. That's not debatable. It goes way beyond shooting.

We wanted shooting, spacing, pace. We can orchestrate a far simpler scoring with him in various line-ups. I think this is an awesome signing.

Like I said, we just drafted the same player as McDermott. Younger and much cheaper. By the time we are good again McDermott will be long gone. The vet thing is overblown. Its just basketball. Either you can play or you cant. Certain vets, yes. They can have an impact. But just any guy in the league isn't going to mentor players just because they hung around a couple years.

Duncan, Parker, Ginoibli, Sean Elliot, Matt Bonner ...etc are around this team all the time if you want veteran input.

I think that's kind of the point of the short contract, making sure Joe's not overwhelmed by everything that comes with turning into a pro, not overwhelming him with the pressure to be "the" sharpshooter from day one, and yes, imparting valuable knowledge to rookies coming into the league.

You can't just say former Spurs are around all the time. They're around when they're around (Timmy's the only one with a locker room at the practice facility). Young teams throughout the league are acquiring vets to ground and settle in the young guys. Everything from handling different opponents, to handling different situations, to being a sounding board, to seeing how a pro goes about his career. Through the entire year and previous ones with vets on the team the young guys sang the praises of the value of having vets on the team. Let's go by their say so about it.

And it's not like Doug is some ancient guy - he's younger than any of our RFA vets on a value contract for money and duration.

And he's not just a one trick pony:


So McD fills a need in 3s taken and accuracy, fills a need in versatility in roles, fills a need in transitioning to a better pace, space team. We were worst in the league in shots distribution 2s/3s - 70%/30%. Brian Wright acknowledged that we need to fix our shooting and versatility and did.

And if we have both of them on the court at a given time? That's deadly. Each of Joe, Doug, and Joshua have better efficiency from 3 than our best 3 shooters this season. That is a huge addition to the team and will only get better with time.

I am very happy with this signing and can't wait to win a beer bet on it!

GREY 1769 wrote:I am very happy with this signing and can't wait to win a beer bet on it!

So if all these other moves would have happened before McBuckets I might have accepted it a little better.

I'm still holding out for Kuzma though. If that happens I won't think tank as much.

imagump1313 wrote:

GREY 1769 wrote:I am very happy with this signing and can't wait to win a beer bet on it!

So if all these other moves would have happened before McBuckets I might have accepted it a little better.

I'm still holding out for Kuzma though. If that happens I won't think tank as much.

Aaaand this is where McBuckets is valuable:


Yeah we'll see about we do if anything about Kuzma. I *think* we'll start the season with Thad for the experience at 4, see how the season plays out and see if we can get an asset to trade for Kuzma at the deadline? Their contracts match, so that's interesting...