Around The NBA

[jbk1234]

Interesting read

https://airalamo.com/posts/question-nobody-asking-about-san-antonio-spurs-long-term-plan

I do wonder if any of the Spurs wings are cheaper than we think to trade for. If the FO is eyeing Ingram (I hope they aren't), Vassell may be a cheaper, younger version and Keldon Johnson is a repeat season of 2021-22 from being a great wing role player (however, his last two seasons have not been that).

Agree on Vassell and I think reality is going to hit the Spurs in terms of him being *off limits* as far as the trade value of their other pieces. Completely disagree on Keldon Johnson. He's a 3 and no D player who doesn't shoot league average from 3. He got moved to the bench on one of the worst teams in the NBA. He's had one good season out of 5 and the Spurs are trying to convince trade partners the 4 seasons that would make him a 9th or 10th man on a good team are the anomalies.

[toooskies]

They may just be passable but they have the size and speed needed on the wing that the Cavs sorely lack every time that kid from Akron jumps ship the past 2 decades.

As far as your conclusion, i come to the complete opposite conclusion. Put Maxi at 5, PJ at 4, Hardaway or a decent shooter at 3 with Luka and Kai.

All night you saw the Celtics with 2 or 3 guys sinking in the paint bc none of the Mavs 5s shoot, an awful archetype for today's NBA, cough Allen. You see DJJ being left like teams do Okoro and PJ is streaky.

Maxi can't guard Zinger. Tatum can shoot over PJ. Hardaway can't guard Brown. Kyrie can't guard any of those starters. Maybe Luka can stick with White. Also, the rebounding advantage the Celtics would enjoy against that lineup would be double digit. You'd be looking at 30 point blowouts.

Classic trade off that JBB wasn't willing to make unless forced in to it by injuries.

Yeah, you can't matchup with length when you go small, but you might just open up your offense.

Even with all our injuries, the Celtics didn't hold us to 89 points. KP is good, but by the numbers, he's nowhere near that good.

I don't know if Dallas has a viable strategy to beat the Celtics in four games out of five, but trying to out-shoot the Celtics isn't going to work consistently. Trying to swing the rebounding advantage far enough in your favor might.

[JonFromVA]

Interesting read

https://airalamo.com/posts/question-nobody-asking-about-san-antonio-spurs-long-term-plan

I do wonder if any of the Spurs wings are cheaper than we think to trade for. If the FO is eyeing Ingram (I hope they aren't), Vassell may be a cheaper, younger version and Keldon Johnson is a repeat season of 2021-22 from being a great wing role player (however, his last two seasons have not been that).

Teams want to trade their spare parts and picks for other team's stars, so, don't count on getting Vassell. Instead consider who might be their Lauri Markkanen.

We could also look in to players that would fit in well with our system, but fingers crossed we move on from our old system which apparently called for undersized guards who get hurt a lot and big men who can't shoot.

[JujitsuFlip]

Interesting read

https://airalamo.com/posts/question-nobody-asking-about-san-antonio-spurs-long-term-plan

I do wonder if any of the Spurs wings are cheaper than we think to trade for. If the FO is eyeing Ingram (I hope they aren't), Vassell may be a cheaper, younger version and Keldon Johnson is a repeat season of 2021-22 from being a great wing role player (however, his last two seasons have not been that).

Teams want to trade their spare parts and picks for other team's stars, so, don't count on getting Vassell. Instead consider who might be their Lauri Markkanen.

We could also look in to players that would fit in well with our system, but fingers crossed we move on from our old system which apparently called for undersized guards who get hurt a lot and big men who can't shoot.

I was gonna say, we're doing things a bit backwards here. We're gonna build the team and then tell the new coach to make square and triangle pegs fit into a round hole lol

[JonFromVA]

I do wonder if any of the Spurs wings are cheaper than we think to trade for. If the FO is eyeing Ingram (I hope they aren't), Vassell may be a cheaper, younger version and Keldon Johnson is a repeat season of 2021-22 from being a great wing role player (however, his last two seasons have not been that).

Teams want to trade their spare parts and picks for other team's stars, so, don't count on getting Vassell. Instead consider who might be their Lauri Markkanen.

We could also look in to players that would fit in well with our system, but fingers crossed we move on from our old system which apparently called for undersized guards who get hurt a lot and big men who can't shoot.

I was gonna say, we're doing things a bit backwards here. We're gonna build the team and then tell the new coach to make square and triangle pegs fit into a round hole lol

I hope not, but there sure are a lot of clocks ticking down on us at the same time.

[jbk1234]

Interesting read

https://airalamo.com/posts/question-nobody-asking-about-san-antonio-spurs-long-term-plan

I do wonder if any of the Spurs wings are cheaper than we think to trade for. If the FO is eyeing Ingram (I hope they aren't), Vassell may be a cheaper, younger version and Keldon Johnson is a repeat season of 2021-22 from being a great wing role player (however, his last two seasons have not been that).

Teams want to trade their spare parts and picks for other team's stars, so, don't count on getting Vassell. Instead consider who might be their Lauri Markkanen.

We could also look in to players that would fit in well with our system, but fingers crossed we move on from our old system which apparently called for undersized guards who get hurt a lot and big men who can't shoot.

They don't have a Lauri Markkenin. That's their problem. Their spacing is atrocious because their prospects are bad shooters. They added the ROY and barely increased their win total.

They're insanely lucky that a PG like Garland might become available to play with Wemby. They could draft in the lottery for the next 5 years and not find one as good as him.

If they say no to including Vassell, there shouldn't be much in the way of further discussions between the teams - at least not involving Garland.

[JonFromVA]

I do wonder if any of the Spurs wings are cheaper than we think to trade for. If the FO is eyeing Ingram (I hope they aren't), Vassell may be a cheaper, younger version and Keldon Johnson is a repeat season of 2021-22 from being a great wing role player (however, his last two seasons have not been that).

Teams want to trade their spare parts and picks for other team's stars, so, don't count on getting Vassell. Instead consider who might be their Lauri Markkanen.

We could also look in to players that would fit in well with our system, but fingers crossed we move on from our old system which apparently called for undersized guards who get hurt a lot and big men who can't shoot.

They don't have a Lauri Markkenin. That's their problem. Their spacing is atrocious because their prospects are bad shooters. They added the ROY and barely increased their win total.

They're insanely lucky that a PG like Garland might become available to play with Wemby. They could draft in the lottery for the next 5 years and not find one as good as him.

If they say no to including Vassell, there shouldn't be much in the way of further discussions between the teams - at least not involving Garland.

They already have Tre Jones, so, of course they will consider whether the upgrade and investment in Garland is worth giving up Vassell.

But my point about Lauri is most people thought he was not much more than salary filler in the Mitchell trade. We said Mobley, Allen, and Garland were off limits and now the Jazz might not even give us Lauri back for any of them.

So I don't know if there's a Lauri on the Spurs ... most likely we wouldn't recognize him. I just don't expect them to trade away their 2nd best player for Garland. Like us they'll want to use their picks instead so they can build on their core, not switch it up.

[jbk1234]

Teams want to trade their spare parts and picks for other team's stars, so, don't count on getting Vassell. Instead consider who might be their Lauri Markkanen.

We could also look in to players that would fit in well with our system, but fingers crossed we move on from our old system which apparently called for undersized guards who get hurt a lot and big men who can't shoot.

They don't have a Lauri Markkenin. That's their problem. Their spacing is atrocious because their prospects are bad shooters. They added the ROY and barely increased their win total.

They're insanely lucky that a PG like Garland might become available to play with Wemby. They could draft in the lottery for the next 5 years and not find one as good as him.

If they say no to including Vassell, there shouldn't be much in the way of further discussions between the teams - at least not involving Garland.

They already have Tre Jones, so, of course they will consider whether the upgrade and investment in Garland is worth giving up Vassell.

But my point about Lauri is most people thought he was not much more than salary filler in the Mitchell trade. We said Mobley, Allen, and Garland were off limits and now the Jazz might not even give us Lauri back for any of them.

So I don't know if there's a Lauri on the Spurs ... most likely we wouldn't recognize him. I just don't expect them to trade away their 2nd best player for Garland. Like us they'll want to use their picks instead so they can build on their core, not switch it up.

It's kind of difficult for me to take the Trae Jones point seriously. He's not a starting caliber PG. It would be like the Cavs saying we already have Okoro so we don't need J. Brown.

The reality is that the Spurs will be a bottom 10 team, again, without adding serious talent to that roster. The Cavs will be, at least, a 4th seed again if we don't trade Garland. We have the option of not trading Garland. These teams are not similarly situated to the Cavs and Jazz when the Mitchell trade was executed.

The Spurs can't (or won't) offer the equivalent of what we gave up for Mitchell so that leaves Vassell. Also, Vassell isn't better than Garland. You can be the second best player on a really bad team without sniffing all star status. Other than to use them as a stalking horse and bid up the price, there's no real reason to talk to the Spurs if they're not including Vassell.

[JonFromVA]

They don't have a Lauri Markkenin. That's their problem. Their spacing is atrocious because their prospects are bad shooters. They added the ROY and barely increased their win total.

They're insanely lucky that a PG like Garland might become available to play with Wemby. They could draft in the lottery for the next 5 years and not find one as good as him.

If they say no to including Vassell, there shouldn't be much in the way of further discussions between the teams - at least not involving Garland.

They already have Tre Jones, so, of course they will consider whether the upgrade and investment in Garland is worth giving up Vassell.

But my point about Lauri is most people thought he was not much more than salary filler in the Mitchell trade. We said Mobley, Allen, and Garland were off limits and now the Jazz might not even give us Lauri back for any of them.

So I don't know if there's a Lauri on the Spurs ... most likely we wouldn't recognize him. I just don't expect them to trade away their 2nd best player for Garland. Like us they'll want to use their picks instead so they can build on their core, not switch it up.

It's kind of difficult for me to take the Trae Jones point seriously. He's not a starting caliber PG. It would be like the Cavs saying we already have Okoro so we don't need J. Brown.

The reality is that the Spurs will be a bottom 10 team, again, without adding serious talent to that roster. The Cavs will be, at least, a 4th seed again if we don't trade Garland. We have the option of not trading Garland. These teams are not similarly situated to the Cavs and Jazz when the Mitchell trade was executed.

The Spurs can't (or won't) offer the equivalent of what we gave up for Mitchell so that leaves Vassell. Also, Vassell isn't better than Garland. You can be the second best player on a really bad team without sniffing all star status. Other than to use them as a stalking horse and bid up the price, there's no real reason to talk to the Spurs if they're not including Vassell.

Yeah, that's rather my point. Unless there's some under-appreciated talent we covet on the Spurs or a 3rd team that wants their picks, we probably won't get a deal done with them. Just like we probably won't pry Trey Murphy or perhaps even Herb Jones from the Pelicans or Mikal Bridges from the Nets.

And that won't change until their desperation to make a move exceeds ours.

Which is why it's reasonable to talk about Ingram or even Towns. There is at least pressure to make a move for both of those teams.

Not to mention, Garland would have a lot more value around the league if he actually had finished the season healthy and strong, but if he did that would we be talking about trading him?

[jbk1234]

They already have Tre Jones, so, of course they will consider whether the upgrade and investment in Garland is worth giving up Vassell.

But my point about Lauri is most people thought he was not much more than salary filler in the Mitchell trade. We said Mobley, Allen, and Garland were off limits and now the Jazz might not even give us Lauri back for any of them.

So I don't know if there's a Lauri on the Spurs ... most likely we wouldn't recognize him. I just don't expect them to trade away their 2nd best player for Garland. Like us they'll want to use their picks instead so they can build on their core, not switch it up.

It's kind of difficult for me to take the Trae Jones point seriously. He's not a starting caliber PG. It would be like the Cavs saying we already have Okoro so we don't need J. Brown.

The reality is that the Spurs will be a bottom 10 team, again, without adding serious talent to that roster. The Cavs will be, at least, a 4th seed again if we don't trade Garland. We have the option of not trading Garland. These teams are not similarly situated to the Cavs and Jazz when the Mitchell trade was executed.

The Spurs can't (or won't) offer the equivalent of what we gave up for Mitchell so that leaves Vassell. Also, Vassell isn't better than Garland. You can be the second best player on a really bad team without sniffing all star status. Other than to use them as a stalking horse and bid up the price, there's no real reason to talk to the Spurs if they're not including Vassell.

Yeah, that's rather my point. Unless there's some under-appreciated talent we covet on the Spurs or a 3rd team that wants their picks, we probably won't get a deal done with them. Just like we probably won't pry Trey Murphy or perhaps even Herb Jones from the Pelicans or Mikal Bridges from the Nets.

And that won't change until their desperation to make a move exceeds ours.

Which is why it's reasonable to talk about Ingram or even Towns. There is at least pressure to make a move for both of those teams.

Not to mention, Garland would have a lot more value around the league if he actually had finished the season healthy and strong, but if he did that would we be talking about trading him?

We wouldn't be talking about trading him but for that YOLO tweet put out there by Klutch. Moving him after an injury-plagued poor season, by his standards, is dumb.

I do think that parting with a player or pick you want to retain is a process. Altman didn't add Agbaji until the very end. The fact that the progression of rumors in terms of the Spurs being very interested in Garland, to Keldon Johnson essentially being available league wide, indicates the Cavs won't take him back as any kind of centerpiece.

Trading partners going through the process of finding out what type of trade value their proposed pieces actually possess is an important part of this. Whether its the Spurs discovering that they may be unable to significantly upgrade that roster without moving Vassell, or the Pelicans discovering that not many teams want to trade their win-now players for Ingram on a max extension, it's important to be patient.

[JonFromVA]

It's kind of difficult for me to take the Trae Jones point seriously. He's not a starting caliber PG. It would be like the Cavs saying we already have Okoro so we don't need J. Brown.

The reality is that the Spurs will be a bottom 10 team, again, without adding serious talent to that roster. The Cavs will be, at least, a 4th seed again if we don't trade Garland. We have the option of not trading Garland. These teams are not similarly situated to the Cavs and Jazz when the Mitchell trade was executed.

The Spurs can't (or won't) offer the equivalent of what we gave up for Mitchell so that leaves Vassell. Also, Vassell isn't better than Garland. You can be the second best player on a really bad team without sniffing all star status. Other than to use them as a stalking horse and bid up the price, there's no real reason to talk to the Spurs if they're not including Vassell.

Yeah, that's rather my point. Unless there's some under-appreciated talent we covet on the Spurs or a 3rd team that wants their picks, we probably won't get a deal done with them. Just like we probably won't pry Trey Murphy or perhaps even Herb Jones from the Pelicans or Mikal Bridges from the Nets.

And that won't change until their desperation to make a move exceeds ours.

Which is why it's reasonable to talk about Ingram or even Towns. There is at least pressure to make a move for both of those teams.

Not to mention, Garland would have a lot more value around the league if he actually had finished the season healthy and strong, but if he did that would we be talking about trading him?

We wouldn't be talking about trading him but for that YOLO tweet put out there by Klutch. Moving him after an injury-plagued poor season, by his standards, is dumb.

I do think that parting with a player or pick you want to retain is a process. Altman didn't add Agbaji until the very end. The fact that the progression of rumors in terms of the Spurs being very interested in Garland, to Keldon Johnson essentially being available league wide, indicates the Cavs won't take him back as any kind of centerpiece.

Trading partners going through the process of finding out what type of trade value their proposed pieces actually possess is an important part of this. Whether its the Spurs discovering that they may be unable to significantly upgrade that roster without moving Vassell, or the Pelicans discovering that not many teams want to trade their win-now players for Ingram on a max extension, it's important to be patient.

If players and agents permit us that luxury ... we'll start to get an idea soon enough.

Only a fraction of what's being said behind the scenes leaks out to us, and we may only hear the bad news, not the good news that the parties involved worked things out. It's funny hearing people retcon Kyrie's unhappiness in Cleveland as if everyone knew before his trade demand washed over the NBA. David Griffin had a sense of it, but there were no leaks or rumors of his unhappiness that I recall.

He had every right after we overplayed him and his knee exploded in 2015, but after the championship? Things seemed pretty swell.

Either way, it doesn't hurt to consider whether there's a deal for Garland that might actually work for both sides and improve the team.

[jbk1234]

Yeah, that's rather my point. Unless there's some under-appreciated talent we covet on the Spurs or a 3rd team that wants their picks, we probably won't get a deal done with them. Just like we probably won't pry Trey Murphy or perhaps even Herb Jones from the Pelicans or Mikal Bridges from the Nets.

And that won't change until their desperation to make a move exceeds ours.

Which is why it's reasonable to talk about Ingram or even Towns. There is at least pressure to make a move for both of those teams.

Not to mention, Garland would have a lot more value around the league if he actually had finished the season healthy and strong, but if he did that would we be talking about trading him?

We wouldn't be talking about trading him but for that YOLO tweet put out there by Klutch. Moving him after an injury-plagued poor season, by his standards, is dumb.

I do think that parting with a player or pick you want to retain is a process. Altman didn't add Agbaji until the very end. The fact that the progression of rumors in terms of the Spurs being very interested in Garland, to Keldon Johnson essentially being available league wide, indicates the Cavs won't take him back as any kind of centerpiece.

Trading partners going through the process of finding out what type of trade value their proposed pieces actually possess is an important part of this. Whether its the Spurs discovering that they may be unable to significantly upgrade that roster without moving Vassell, or the Pelicans discovering that not many teams want to trade their win-now players for Ingram on a max extension, it's important to be patient.

If players and agents permit us that luxury ... we'll start to get an idea soon enough.

Only a fraction of what's being said behind the scenes leaks out to us, and we may only hear the bad news, not the good news that the parties involved worked things out. It's funny hearing people retcon Kyrie's unhappiness in Cleveland as if everyone knew before his trade demand washed over the NBA. David Griffin had a sense of it, but there were no leaks or rumors of his unhappiness that I recall.

He had every right after we overplayed him and his knee exploded in 2015, but after the championship? Things seemed pretty swell.

Either way, it doesn't hurt to consider whether there's a deal for Garland that might actually work for both sides and improve the team.

If we trade Garland and/or Allen, and don't at least break even, then this team's ceiling will be irreparably lowered. This can't be a situation where we walk away with the Nets pick, a role player, and a crippled IT. If that means there's no trade, then Altman needs to buckle up and ride out the storm.

Edit: Kyrie was always moody in Cleveland, going back to his rookie contract, and there was plenty of smoke, including from B Mac, who was the forum moderator. His ego was easily bruised and there were plenty of reported instances of him ignoring his coaches, even after the Big 3 formed.

[JonFromVA]

We wouldn't be talking about trading him but for that YOLO tweet put out there by Klutch. Moving him after an injury-plagued poor season, by his standards, is dumb.

I do think that parting with a player or pick you want to retain is a process. Altman didn't add Agbaji until the very end. The fact that the progression of rumors in terms of the Spurs being very interested in Garland, to Keldon Johnson essentially being available league wide, indicates the Cavs won't take him back as any kind of centerpiece.

Trading partners going through the process of finding out what type of trade value their proposed pieces actually possess is an important part of this. Whether its the Spurs discovering that they may be unable to significantly upgrade that roster without moving Vassell, or the Pelicans discovering that not many teams want to trade their win-now players for Ingram on a max extension, it's important to be patient.

If players and agents permit us that luxury ... we'll start to get an idea soon enough.

Only a fraction of what's being said behind the scenes leaks out to us, and we may only hear the bad news, not the good news that the parties involved worked things out. It's funny hearing people retcon Kyrie's unhappiness in Cleveland as if everyone knew before his trade demand washed over the NBA. David Griffin had a sense of it, but there were no leaks or rumors of his unhappiness that I recall.

He had every right after we overplayed him and his knee exploded in 2015, but after the championship? Things seemed pretty swell.

Either way, it doesn't hurt to consider whether there's a deal for Garland that might actually work for both sides and improve the team.

If we trade Garland and/or Allen, and don't at least break even, then this team's ceiling will be irreparably lowered. This can't be a situation where we walk away with the Nets pick, a role player, and a crippled IT. If that means there's no trade, then Altman needs to buckle up and ride out the storm.

Edit: Kyrie was always moody in Cleveland, going back to his rookie contract, and there was plenty of smoke, including from B Mac, who was the forum moderator. His ego was easily bruised and there were plenty of reported instances of him ignoring his coaches, even after the Big 3 formed.

Oh, I didn't say there weren't rumors about problems with Kyrie; but specific things like him no longer interacting with teammates during the playoffs, being upset because LeBron "sonned" him, or talking to Griff about not being happy even after just winning a championship came out later.

[jbk1234]

What the Knick are going through with O.G. is exactly why I didn't want trade for him. Guy averages 50 games a season over the last 5-6 seasons, has multiple injuries over the last playoff run, has a limited offensive game, and is exerting max pressure on the Knicks for his next contract.

[KuruptedCav]

Trade for a guy in a walk year and pay a price you can’t afford to lose. Kind of a rough spot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JonFromVA]

OG would have looked sweet in street clothes with Allen and Mitchell. Everyone knew he wanted the max and he instantly elevated the Knicks and made his case for it. We'll have to see where cautious negotiating gets them.

Being healthy when it matters is the most important thing, but there's a lot of incentive to take a risk.

Boston paid Porzingis $36M for not a heckuva lot in the playoffs and overcame it anyway.

Tough choices and we'll stll have plenty of our own, but we have little choice. We're not going to blink when we offer Don a max extension when he's struggled with injuries in the playoffs the past 4 years.

[JujitsuFlip]

The off season has officially begun. Giddey to the Bulls for Caruso.

[JonFromVA]

The off season has officially begun. Giddey to the Bulls for Caruso.

Is this more because he took home an under-aged girl that snuck in to an adult club or because of how he played on-court?

[JujitsuFlip]

The off season has officially begun. Giddey to the Bulls for Caruso.

Is this more because he took home an under-aged girl that snuck in to an adult club or because of how he played on-court?

Lol Jon with the shots fired.

[ijspeelman]

The off season has officially begun. Giddey to the Bulls for Caruso.

I'll admit I am jealous the Thunder were able to jump on this trade without giving up too much. Caruso would be the perfect back-up PG on any team