Scase wrote:PushDaRock wrote:Scase wrote:I've said this a million times on these boards, Siakams return was less of an issue, than when we moved him. Keeping Siakam longer than we needed to resulted in us trading away a top 6 protected FRP, and treadmilling another 2 seasons.
It's opportunity cost, not just a mediocre return.
You can hate the Poeltl trade, right now it objectively isn't looking like a good trade but a lot can still change what the end result will look like based on the pick that ends up conveying and any potential return for Poeltl.
I just can't understand the logic behind trashing this FO for "treadmilling" to 48 and 41 win seasons with a young core while praising the Spurs FO who tried to do the same thing with even worst results with a much older core before pivoting to a rebuild.
Because we didnt have a young core? Scottie was the young part of that core, and arguably OG who was 24/25. But both FVV and Siakam were 27/28.
Last year our top 5 minutes played were Scottie (21), GTJ (24), OG (25), Siakam (28), FVV (28), and we ADDED Jak (27). That is in no way young.
During the 2 "treadmill" years, the Spurs added Tre (21), Vassel (20), and Primo (19) as notable players. Who did we add? Precious (22), Thad (34), Juancho (27), OPJ (29), Koloko (22), Gradey (19).
They added YOUNG players and gave minutes to YOUNG players, cause they were headed into a rebuild. We doubled down and brought in OLD players, because our FO thought this core could work.
They set themselves up to rebuild, we didn't. If you think those are the same situations, there is nothing more to discuss here.
lmao you clearly aren't trying to argue in good faith when you throw in Juancho as a notable player we added.