SPURS 2024 OFF-SEASON INTEREST, TRADE, AND FA RUMOURS THREAD

[Whole Truth]

IMO Lauri exploded under a great young coach in Utah. I think he's still the same player that the Bulls & Cavs moved on from. In Utah something like 90% of Lauri's made buckets are assisted.

Limited creation ability, poor defender & rebounder.

I think the minute he's traded into the wrong usage would be immediate buyers remorse. The flip side is Utah has maximized his value, so you're paying a premium to find out.

Didn't realise this about Lauri but I take your word for it. In that case, when the Spurs had difficulty passing to Wemby at times, I don't see how Lauri could be a target.

I look up the exact number & post it for you.

[Whole Truth]

Sorry Rusty, I couldn't find the thread.

NO's fans have a vesting interest in pairing Lauri with Zion & a poster on a NO's board put up his assisted rate & all I accurately remember is thinking how shockingly few of his made buckets weren't assisted. It was an unbelievable # that left you wondering if he had any creation ability. To the point it wouldn't shock me if it was greater than 90%.

Having said that, I'd suggest if you know where to find these type of stats to see for yourself & not take my word for it. Due diligence.

[Rustyman]

Sorry Rusty, I couldn't find the thread.

NO's fans have a vesting interest in pairing Lauri with Zion & a poster on a NO's board put up his assisted rate & all I accurately remember is thinking how shockingly few of his made buckets weren't assisted. It was an unbelievable # that left you wondering if he had any creation ability. To the point it wouldn't shock me if it was greater than 90%.

Having said that, I'd suggest if you know where to find these type of stats to see for yourself & not take my word for it. Due diligence.

No problem. I am not doubting your word. Just simply saying that with the issues the Spurs had passing to Wemby last year, it makes me think that Lauri might not be such a great option for the Spurs, especially at the price the Jazz will demand.

[Whole Truth]

Sorry Rusty, I couldn't find the thread.

NO's fans have a vesting interest in pairing Lauri with Zion & a poster on a NO's board put up his assisted rate & all I accurately remember is thinking how shockingly few of his made buckets weren't assisted. It was an unbelievable # that left you wondering if he had any creation ability. To the point it wouldn't shock me if it was greater than 90%.

Having said that, I'd suggest if you know where to find these type of stats to see for yourself & not take my word for it. Due diligence.

No problem. I am not doubting your word. Just simply saying that with the issues the Spurs had passing to Wemby last year, it makes me think that Lauri might not be such a great option for the Spurs, especially at the price the Jazz will demand.

Can't argue with their utilization of him off ball, it's soared his value. He has to many holes in his game though IMO for his current asking price in trade.

He could look good next to Wemby if you had a playmaking guard & are willing to risk the high asking price.

[Rustyman]

Can't argue with their utilization of him off ball, it's soared his value. He has to many holes in his game though IMO for his current asking price in trade.

He could look good next to Wemby if you had a playmaking guard & are willing to risk the high asking price.

Not really in favour for that as the Spurs then have to acquire a proven playmaking guard AND Lauri and that would take a significant proportion of their current assets.

Assets are there to be eventually used but using it on Lauri when I think his skill set can be reproduced in a draftee (initially at a lower level) is I think inefficient use of assets.

If the Spurs want to acquire a proven playmaking guard this year, I am all for it but that should be the piece that makes the other players better not having to acquire more proven players to leverage your investment.

Lets be honest, the Spurs are unlikely to be a top 6 team in the West this coming season. Our acquisitions should be based on making the play-in. If they do, that is great. If they don't then re-evaluate and pivot to what is needed to get better.

[G R E Y]

Can't argue with their utilization of him off ball, it's soared his value. He has to many holes in his game though IMO for his current asking price in trade.

He could look good next to Wemby if you had a playmaking guard & are willing to risk the high asking price.

Not really in favour for that as the Spurs then have to acquire a proven playmaking guard AND Lauri and that would take a significant proportion of their current assets.

Assets are there to be eventually used but using it on Lauri when I think his skill set can be reproduced in a draftee (initially at a lower level) is I think inefficient use of assets.

If the Spurs want to acquire a proven playmaking guard this year, I am all for it but that should be the piece that makes the other players better not having to acquire more proven players to leverage your investment.

Lets be honest, the Spurs are unlikely to be a top 6 team in the West this coming season. Our acquisitions should be based on making the play-in. If they do, that is great. If they don't then re-evaluate and pivot to what is needed to get better.

Agree about cost and proper utilization of assets. Lauri is a very solid option but like you said, he's more of a focal point. More of a player who benefits from having the ball in his hands. We'd have to send a lot of assets for a player whose full range of skills I'm not sure we could fully utilize. Like with Keldon, there's only so much ball to go around. Maybe. Maybe we could make it work. Teams shut down 1st and 2nd options often enough that a 3rd is a proven necessity.

But ought that be at the 4? Maybe just the 1, at least for now. We're not the team yet to be filling all holes all at once. There's too much to fix with being only set at 2 and 5. I want Sochan to have the chance to prove himself, for a 3 to be more 3&D higher level talent, more off ball, for the 1 to be a 2-way level player who can create his own shot. From all reports, we're seeking that latter prototype right now.

Not sure we ought to be targeting something like the play-in. That can largely be about too many external factors. It's about internal progress and while yes these ought to be tested by facing good teams, progress or lack of it ought not solely be tied to record.

Anyway, bottom line, we'll see how Sochan can/is willing to share alongside Wemby as he grows his own game. That's important. I'd be surprised if we already feel we have seen enough growth to determine we need a Lauri instead (maybe in addition to and put Sochan at the 3??)

See, lots of questions remain unanswered while we pursue the glaring holes at 3 and then 1.

[Rustyman]

Not sure we ought to be targeting something like the play-in. That can largely be about too many external factors. It's about internal progress and while yes these ought to be tested by facing good teams, progress or lack of it ought not solely be tied to record.

Anyway, bottom line, we'll see how Sochan can/is willing to share alongside Wemby as he grows his own game. That's important. I'd be surprised if we already feel we have seen enough growth to determine we need a Lauri instead (maybe in addition to and put Sochan at the 3??)

See, lots of questions remain unanswered while we pursue the glaring holes at 3 and then 1.

Agree with you on Sochan. His development will be one of the keys if not the key to the coming season. I expect Wemby to improve his efficiency and output based on playing more minutes and hopefully with improving and better players but Sochan is the big factor which determines if we compete for the play-in or not. The rookies will be uneven as they find their place but even if the only impact is to improve the output from PG and SF, that is what is expected.

On competing for a play-in, yes, there are many external factors. If the Spurs achieve 35-40 wins, for me the season is a success. I don't think you are going to see the same outcome for the West in the coming season as I expect a .500 record (like Houston achieved this past season) to be good enough for anything from the 8-10 position.

[imagump1313]

Not sure we ought to be targeting something like the play-in. That can largely be about too many external factors. It's about internal progress and while yes these ought to be tested by facing good teams, progress or lack of it ought not solely be tied to record.

Anyway, bottom line, we'll see how Sochan can/is willing to share alongside Wemby as he grows his own game. That's important. I'd be surprised if we already feel we have seen enough growth to determine we need a Lauri instead (maybe in addition to and put Sochan at the 3??)

See, lots of questions remain unanswered while we pursue the glaring holes at 3 and then 1.

Agree with you on Sochan. His development will be one of the keys if not the key to the coming season. I expect Wemby to improve his efficiency and output based on playing more minutes and hopefully with improving and better players but Sochan is the big factor which determines if we compete for the play-in or not. The rookies will be uneven as they find their place but even if the only impact is to improve the output from PG and SF, that is what is expected.

On competing for a play-in, yes, there are many external factors. If the Spurs achieve 35-40 wins, for me the season is a success. I don't think you are going to see the same outcome for the West in the coming season as I expect a .500 record (like Houston achieved this past season) to be good enough for anything from the 8-10 position.

I'm not really concerned about Sochan. IMO we stunted his growth by attempting that stupid PG experiment with him. Its our own fault. Anyone who watches basketball could tell that wasn't going to work 5 games into the season yet we insisted on pushing it way too long. I have no idea what Pop was thinking there.

Sochan is great at what he does. Rebounding, defense, being active around the offensive basket. He can even hit some threes which was the only thing positive we learned about him during that experiment. Just let him roam and cause havoc. I think he will be useful for this team.

I think you guys are right. The more I think about Markenen the less I see him being a fit for what it would cost. I loved him and wanted him to be a Spur but that was before Wemby. Now I don't think he is someone to spend assets on.

[G R E Y]

Please not Murray Please PLEASE N-O-T Murray...

Read on Twitter

[G R E Y]

A thought on Trae's contract. I still keep falling for the per year amount and balk as the numbers are ever larger.

But... We must be mindful of viewing contracts as percentage of cap. With the NBA's recent tv/media deal near done, with the cap rising, contracts increasing, and league soon expanding, growth is the repeated pattern.

So even if we bit the bullet and acquired Trae, to me it is less his contract, gargantuan though it is, than the assets we'd be sending the other way. I do not want to part with 2025 unprotected.

I don't pretend to understand the new cap landscape what with aprons now in place other than general understanding that they're impactful in terms of cap management in ways contracts have not been before.

And it's only a 2 year commitment at worst. That's also why we should not blow all our assets. It's a balance that I think we can manage but it does diminish room for contract error.

It does give us a very solid top 3 with good supporting cast.

If we could swap 4 and 8 and whichever future pick that is not 2025 unprotected along with say Keldon and Collins and maybe Branham or whoever for matching financials for this year's #1 (Risacher) and Trae that takes care of the 3 and 1 starters for us and solidifies 1 through 5.

[imagump1313]

A thought on Trae's contract. I still keep falling for the per year amount and balk as the numbers are ever larger.

But... We must be mindful of viewing contracts as percentage of cap. With the NBA's recent tv/media deal near done, with the cap rising, contracts increasing, and league soon expanding, growth is the repeated pattern.

So even if we bit the bullet and acquired Trae, to me it is less his contract, gargantuan though it is, than the assets we'd be sending the other way. I do not want to part with 2025 unprotected.

I don't pretend to understand the new cap landscape what with aprons now in place other than general understanding that they're impactful in terms of cap management in ways contracts have not been before.

And it's only a 2 year commitment at worst. That's also why we should not blow all our assets. It's a balance that I think we can manage but it does diminish room for contract error.

It does give us a very solid top 3 with good supporting cast.

If we could swap 4 and 8 and whichever future pick that is not 2025 unprotected along with say Keldon and Collins and maybe Branham or whoever for marching financials for this year's #1 (Risacher) and Trae that takes care of the 3 and 1 starters for us and solidifies 1 through 5.

I agree we don't need to sell the farm to get Young if thats what we are aiming for. And I don't believe there is a huge market for him around the league at this point. I don't see any other team falling all over themselves wanting to trade for him so it should be close to whatever we want to spend.

As much as we both dislike Murray now, I actually still might be open to it. He is a little cheaper and if he can curb his effing attitude under Pop and be a team player like he was earlier in his career he's not the worst option out there.

I definitely wouldnt be re-doing his deal or anything like that until he proves he can fit in and not be a total dick. Also stay healthy.

[G R E Y]

A thought on Trae's contract. I still keep falling for the per year amount and balk as the numbers are ever larger.

But... We must be mindful of viewing contracts as percentage of cap. With the NBA's recent tv/media deal near done, with the cap rising, contracts increasing, and league soon expanding, growth is the repeated pattern.

So even if we bit the bullet and acquired Trae, to me it is less his contract, gargantuan though it is, than the assets we'd be sending the other way. I do not want to part with 2025 unprotected.

I don't pretend to understand the new cap landscape what with aprons now in place other than general understanding that they're impactful in terms of cap management in ways contracts have not been before.

And it's only a 2 year commitment at worst. That's also why we should not blow all our assets. It's a balance that I think we can manage but it does diminish room for contract error.

It does give us a very solid top 3 with good supporting cast.

If we could swap 4 and 8 and whichever future pick that is not 2025 unprotected along with say Keldon and Collins and maybe Branham or whoever for marching financials for this year's #1 (Risacher) and Trae that takes care of the 3 and 1 starters for us and solidifies 1 through 5.

I agree we don't need to sell the farm to get Young if thats what we are aiming for. And I don't believe there is a huge market for him around the league at this point. I don't see any other team falling all over themselves wanting to trade for him so it should be close to whatever we want to spend.

As much as we both dislike Murray now, I actually still might be open to it. He is a little cheaper and if he can curb his effing attitude under Pop and be a team player like he was earlier in his career he's not the worst option out there.

I definitely wouldnt be re-doing his deal or anything like that until he proves he can fit in and not be a total dick. Also stay healthy.

Safe to say it's too late for that. Leopard. Spots. He showed his colours after the trade, both about us and towards opponents, and then team mates, in particular the one guy he sought to play alongside to begin with.

There's been him looking off Quinn and call his own play (read: his own number), blow off Trae, and locker room problems per Hawks insider podcasts.

Just a **** cluster **** we got rid of. I think it's not a coincidence that every single PG rumour linked to us is Klutch - Murray, Garland, Trae up until recently, and Dillingham. Nice try.

Incidentally, Trae is now with CAA, the same agency as Devin, who hails from Georgia. Trae is from Texas. Maybe tenuous connections, but his tweets and that veritable love fest at the AS game between him and Wemby were some smoke/fire signals if there ever were some.

Murray I think will eventually end up on the Lakers who I don't think can afford Trae. There seems to be some more competition for Murray with NOP rumours swirling, dangling BI reportedly. Agree that the market, then, is smaller for Trae. And I'd rather Trae at his contract than Murray on however less he makes for dick reasons lol

[Rustyman]

If we could swap 4 and 8 and whichever future pick that is not 2025 unprotected along with say Keldon and Collins and maybe Branham or whoever for marching financials for this year's #1 (Risacher) and Trae that takes care of the 3 and 1 starters for us and solidifies 1 through 5.

That to me would be my dream scenario. Though I absolutely hate Young's contract. Being able to get Risacher, Tre and only give up this year and next year's protected picks (both Bulls and Hornets) and Keldon/Collins/filler would be fantastic. I do however think Atlanta would demand at least 2 of their 3 picks for Tre and the no.1.

[Rustyman]

I agree we don't need to sell the farm to get Young if thats what we are aiming for. And I don't believe there is a huge market for him around the league at this point. I don't see any other team falling all over themselves wanting to trade for him so it should be close to whatever we want to spend.

As much as we both dislike Murray now, I actually still might be open to it. He is a little cheaper and if he can curb his effing attitude under Pop and be a team player like he was earlier in his career he's not the worst option out there.

I definitely wouldnt be re-doing his deal or anything like that until he proves he can fit in and not be a total dick. Also stay healthy.

Nope. I am definitely off the Murray bus. With his attitude, I doubt whether he would fit in with Wemby and if we draft another Frenchman this year, I think his brain would burst. There is an underlying resentment in some sections of the NBA against foreign born players and I think Murray might have made statements in the past which puts him in that camp.

[Rustyman]

Safe to say it's too late for that. Leopard. Spots. He showed his colours after the trade, both about us and towards opponents, and then team mates, in particular the one guy he sought to play alongside to begin with.

There's been him looking off Quinn and call his own play (read: his own number), blow off Trae, and locker room problems per Hawks insider podcasts.

Just a **** cluster **** we got rid of. I think it's not a coincidence that every single PG rumour linked to us is Klutch - Murray, Garland, Trae up until recently, and Dillingham. Nice try.

100% in agreement with this. I think that Klutch wants to push their players to play with Wemby but I don't think the FO has forgotten how they basically forced Murray out of SA.

[G R E Y]

Safe to say it's too late for that. Leopard. Spots. He showed his colours after the trade, both about us and towards opponents, and then team mates, in particular the one guy he sought to play alongside to begin with.

There's been him looking off Quinn and call his own play (read: his own number), blow off Trae, and locker room problems per Hawks insider podcasts.

Just a **** cluster **** we got rid of. I think it's not a coincidence that every single PG rumour linked to us is Klutch - Murray, Garland, Trae up until recently, and Dillingham. Nice try.

100% in agreement with this. I think that Klutch wants to push their players to play with Wemby but I don't think the FO has forgotten how they basically forced Murray out of SA.

Well they can force him to LAL next if they want. But I also think a lot of that was driven by Murray himself. Klutch won't do what a player doesn't want. If he is happy in whichever place and successful, fine. But after featuring Murray and not getting much higher than the previous season, he went all 'I work too hard not to win' posting and was sending all kinds of he's done with us signals. Then seemed put off by how quickly we accommodated him lmao.

Same scenario in Hawks. Soured quickly with exactly what he wanted. Can't have a guy thinking he's the best on the team and who knows better than coach or actual #1 option. Admiring tweets about Wemby aren't erasing his previous statements nor are people unaware about what's been going down in ATL. Done with all that. We can and will acquire whomever we deem a better fit for Wemby and it won't be driven by Klutch clutching repeatedly.

[Whole Truth]

Safe to say it's too late for that. Leopard. Spots. He showed his colours after the trade, both about us and towards opponents, and then team mates, in particular the one guy he sought to play alongside to begin with.

There's been him looking off Quinn and call his own play (read: his own number), blow off Trae, and locker room problems per Hawks insider podcasts.

Just a **** cluster **** we got rid of. I think it's not a coincidence that every single PG rumour linked to us is Klutch - Murray, Garland, Trae up until recently, and Dillingham. Nice try.

100% in agreement with this. I think that Klutch wants to push their players to play with Wemby but I don't think the FO has forgotten how they basically forced Murray out of SA.

Since I started following NO's, there's been talk that Griff didn't want to deal with Klutch for these same reasons. NO's fans say Klutch is only about the value of their asset.

They force Murray out from a rebuilding Spurs, now forcing their PG clients to play with Wemby who will elevate their stock.

I don't know what it's like to deal with Klutch but what I do know, is if the Spurs like Garland, there's leverage in the situation & Klutch are not going to force him out of a Spurs team featuring Wemby.

It doesn't make it right but if I understand how they operate Spurs can leverage the situation because they have the value in Wemby that Clutch wants.

[Rustyman]

Since I started following NO's, there's been talk that Griff didn't want to deal with Klutch for these same reasons. NO's fans say Klutch is only about the value of their asset.

They force Murray out from a rebuilding Spurs, now forcing their PG clients to play with Wemby who will elevate their stock.

I don't know what it's like to deal with Klutch but what I do know, is if the Spurs like Garland, there's leverage in the situation & Klutch are not going to force him out of a Spurs team featuring Wemby.

It doesn't make it right but if I understand how they operate Spurs can leverage the situation because they have the value in Wemby that Clutch wants.

Garland I can take being a Klutch client (while holding my nose) as his deal is already inked. However, as he has 4 years remaining on his deal at around $40m/year, the Spurs better not be trading too much for him. Keldon+Collins/Graham to match salary, a young player Branham/Wesley, the 4 or 8 (if 8, then include protected Chicago or Charlotte picks next year). Anything more than that and I think its a NO from me and I think my proposal is a generous one.

[Whole Truth]

Since I started following NO's, there's been talk that Griff didn't want to deal with Klutch for these same reasons. NO's fans say Klutch is only about the value of their asset.

They force Murray out from a rebuilding Spurs, now forcing their PG clients to play with Wemby who will elevate their stock.

I don't know what it's like to deal with Klutch but what I do know, is if the Spurs like Garland, there's leverage in the situation & Klutch are not going to force him out of a Spurs team featuring Wemby.

It doesn't make it right but if I understand how they operate Spurs can leverage the situation because they have the value in Wemby that Clutch wants.

Garland I can take being a Klutch client (while holding my nose) as his deal is already inked. However, as he has 4 years remaining on his deal at around $40m/year, the Spurs better not be trading too much for him. Keldon+Collins/Graham to match salary, a young player Branham/Wesley, the 4 or 8 (if 8, then include protected Chicago or Charlotte picks next year). Anything more than that and I think its a NO from me and I think my proposal is a generous one.

I think it's a fair value assessment. For me if NO's are involved & Spurs are not enamored with Risarcher considering all the news of Spurs packaging up. I don't think Clingan falls to 8. So if NO's are in fact involved in a multiple team deal with BI to Cavs & Garland to Spurs. I'd agree to (Keldon, Collins, #4 Clingan) for intended purpose of trading up & be the team to offer a FRP to Atlanta for #1.

Depending on the Hawks asking price of Murray.

I'd be good with (BI, FRP) for (Keldon, Collins, #1 Sarr)

I'd like to upgrade CJ at point defensively but I think not wanting him has blinded me a bit in that I don't expect either Sarr or Daniels to be ready next yr & sticking with CJ might be to a benefit. With this trade NO's address the biggest hole on roster With Sarr & Collins, get a young Keldon who's a cheaper option, to share SF with Murphy moving into the starting rotation.

Sarr - Collins - Nance --------------2yr development gap ----- Sarr 21
Zion - Nance -------------------------------------------------------- Zion 26
Murphy - Keldon/Daniels ------------------------------------------ Murphy 26
Herb - Hawkins/Daniels ------------------------------------------- Herb 28 - Hawkins 24
CJ - Jose/Daniels --------------------------------------------------- Daniels 22

2yrs, CJ's 30m expired freeing cap. So while Murray will upgrade CJ now, which is how I was watching the situation despite targeting a raw big in Sarr. For what Hawks appear to want for him, I'm good with just targeting Keldon/Sarr for BI/FRP.

[G R E Y]

Since I started following NO's, there's been talk that Griff didn't want to deal with Klutch for these same reasons. NO's fans say Klutch is only about the value of their asset.

They force Murray out from a rebuilding Spurs, now forcing their PG clients to play with Wemby who will elevate their stock.

I don't know what it's like to deal with Klutch but what I do know, is if the Spurs like Garland, there's leverage in the situation & Klutch are not going to force him out of a Spurs team featuring Wemby.

It doesn't make it right but if I understand how they operate Spurs can leverage the situation because they have the value in Wemby that Clutch wants.

Garland I can take being a Klutch client (while holding my nose) as his deal is already inked. However, as he has 4 years remaining on his deal at around $40m/year, the Spurs better not be trading too much for him. Keldon+Collins/Graham to match salary, a young player Branham/Wesley, the 4 or 8 (if 8, then include protected Chicago or Charlotte picks next year). Anything more than that and I think its a NO from me and I think my proposal is a generous one.

I think it's a fair value assessment. For me if NO's are involved & Spurs are not enamored with Risarcher considering all the news of Spurs packaging up. I don't think Clingan falls to 8. So if NO's are in fact involved in a multiple team deal with BI to Cavs & Garland to Spurs. I'd agree to (Keldon, Collins, #4 Clingan) for intended purpose of trading up & be the team to offer a FRP to Atlanta for #1.

Depending on the Hawks asking price of Murray.

I'd be good with (BI, FRP) for (Keldon, Collins, #1 Sarr)

I'd like to upgrade CJ at point defensively but I think not wanting him has blinded me a bit in that I don't expect either Sarr or Daniels to be ready next yr & sticking with CJ might be to a benefit. With this trade NO's address the biggest hole on roster With Sarr & Collins, get a young Keldon who's a cheaper option, to share SF with Murphy moving into the starting rotation.

Sarr - Collins - Nance --------------2yr development gap ----- Sarr 21
Zion - Nance -------------------------------------------------------- Zion 26
Murphy - Keldon/Daniels ------------------------------------------ Murphy 26
Herb - Hawkins/Daniels ------------------------------------------- Herb 28 - Hawkins 24
CJ - Jose/Daniels --------------------------------------------------- Daniels 22

2yrs, CJ's 30m expired freeing cap. So while Murray will upgrade CJ now, which is how I was watching the situation despite targeting a raw big in Sarr. For what Hawks appear to want for him, I'm good with just targeting Keldon/Sarr for BI/FRP.

If we do move up it's for Risacher. We've been scouting him for a while, and by scouting I mean RC traveled to watch him play, and RC now runs the entire Spurs Sports & Entertainment. The majority owner traveled to watch him play, too. And that was well before the draft slots had been set. So the interest is clearly there.

We didn't want BI when he was first presented to us by LAL (though he was part of an unattractive offer). Just because a guy is drafted high does not mean he lives up to the billing. I doubt we want him now either. Honestly would rather have Trae at his contract (huge, but shorter) than whatever extension BI is about to be eligible for.