Spurs trade needs?

[Texas Chuck]

Most of these proposals are very shortsighted. Making the Spurs better in the short term isn't particularly difficult: spend your assets getting a competent backup C that is a legitimate rim protector, get a legit starting 3 that can really shoot, get a proven win now coach that forces Wemby to play a more traditional, limited role that keeps him closer to the basket, has him shooting way less 3s and handling the ball much less, get rid of all playing time for 21 and under guys like Wesley, Branham and Cissoko, etc I think Spurs can easily be a playoff team this year if they want to, and I don't think it'd be particularly difficult.

However, Spurs' goal isn't to pad the record this season and expedite a playoffs appearance, but rather to maximize their chances of winning titles in the long term. That means you need to develop your young guys with potential, even at the expense of short term chances, which requires playing young guys through their growing pains (Castle, Sochan, even Wemby) rather than getting win now vets to play ahead of them, saving your powder for the right time rather than wasting resources in shortsighted solutions (like Randall who would be a rental or an overpay to keep, for a marginal improvement that could disrupt team chemistry), etc.

Spurs have been approaching this process very carefully, nurturing the young guys by adding very specific vets that help them while not costing resources to acquire, who will phase out as the young guys blossom. There's a very deliberate strategy, just not one most people here agree with, because they're thinking tomorrow instead of 3, 4, 5 years. I'm sure they'd consider a consolidation trade to find Wemby a Robin that can grow with him (no certainties Castle can be that long term), but that is unlikely to be your run-of-the-mill misfit whose team is aching to rid themselves of, which is what you typically find here in trade proposals. May not sound too friendly for your random trade proposal, but I don't think that's a priority for the Spurs FO.

Why do you come here? Every other post from you, you spend a bunch of time telling the board how ignorant it is? So you gain nothing from us. So I'm guessing you feel like you are doing us all a big service?

Maybe share your insight without telling everyone else how little they know. I know I'd pay more attention to you.

[zimpy27]

I think they will take a few opportunities that arise to them.

I expect their rise to be more like OKC and not a long drawn out process.

OKC made no moves until their squad got them to playoffs then they made moves to improve the team with vet help.

Unless of course a decent all star is available for cap space or a basic trade.


Like Randle+Ingles for Barnes+ZCollins or something

[Chinook]

This thread is asking what the Spurs need in terms of trades. I don't think coming in here and saying that they don't really need anything for the direction they want to go is actually off topic. It's actually perfectly valid to have a conservative view on the Spurs doing trades and to be willing to express that sentiment in threads discussing that topic. This board is not an echo chamber; we can disagree on the conceit of the discussion just as we can on various points.

I don't think the Spurs should be looking at the trade market right now. They are finally getting close to having their full rotation again. It would be really nice if they could see it in action and where a healthy version of their squad stacks up before making moves. If they're in a position to make a playoff push in five or six weeks, then it makes sense to pounce. Otherwise, they might eventually trade away Paul if someone comes calling or would just go into the summer with their squad.

A lot of Spurs fans are excited about the Paul, Castle, Champagnie, Barnes, Wembanyama starting unit and think the Spurs' future might be in having a similar unit on the floor. I don't agree with that at all and think the team needs to incorporate a second high-volume scorer into that unit to stabilize the flow of the offense. It doesn't HAVE to happen this year, but getting some offense-oriented two-guard to replace Champ in the first unit could make sense. If Vassell and Sochan are going to be bench players for the next two years, then they don't need Johnson. Trading him and Jones for McCollum isn't ideal, because Jones should have an expanding role with Paul's aging and Castle playing as a wing.

The most elegant thing to do is to just start Vassell and bring Champ off the bench with Jones, Johnson and Sochan. But Devin does have a nice sixth-man game. Maybe Johnson can replace Champ, but I don't know that removing a three-and-D guy for a shorter guy who's shaky at both makes more sense. That's all the more reason to hold for a bit longer to see if those factors can work themselves out. They might find more success playing the clean-up role off later movement rather than being the initiators anyway.

[Texas Chuck]

This thread is asking what the Spurs need in terms of trades. I don't think coming in here and saying that they don't really need anything for the direction they want to go is actually off topic. It's actually perfectly valid to have a conservative view on the Spurs doing trades and to be willing to express that sentiment in threads discussing that topic. This board is not an echo chamber; we can disagree on the conceit of the discussion just as we can on various points.

Of course that's a valid position. Never remotely suggested otherwise.

[Rustyman]

Most of these proposals are very shortsighted. Making the Spurs better in the short term isn't particularly difficult: spend your assets getting a competent backup C that is a legitimate rim protector, get a legit starting 3 that can really shoot, get a proven win now coach that forces Wemby to play a more traditional, limited role that keeps him closer to the basket, has him shooting way less 3s and handling the ball much less, get rid of all playing time for 21 and under guys like Wesley, Branham and Cissoko, etc I think Spurs can easily be a playoff team this year if they want to, and I don't think it'd be particularly difficult.

However, Spurs' goal isn't to pad the record this season and expedite a playoffs appearance, but rather to maximize their chances of winning titles in the long term. That means you need to develop your young guys with potential, even at the expense of short term chances, which requires playing young guys through their growing pains (Castle, Sochan, even Wemby) rather than getting win now vets to play ahead of them, saving your powder for the right time rather than wasting resources in shortsighted solutions (like Randall who would be a rental or an overpay to keep, for a marginal improvement that could disrupt team chemistry), etc.

Spurs have been approaching this process very carefully, nurturing the young guys by adding very specific vets that help them while not costing resources to acquire, who will phase out as the young guys blossom. There's a very deliberate strategy, just not one most people here agree with, because they're thinking tomorrow instead of 3, 4, 5 years. I'm sure they'd consider a consolidation trade to find Wemby a Robin that can grow with him (no certainties Castle can be that long term), but that is unlikely to be your run-of-the-mill misfit whose team is aching to rid themselves of, which is what you typically find here in trade proposals. May not sound too friendly for your random trade proposal, but I don't think that's a priority for the Spurs FO.

My view is that while the Spurs need to build for the future, they can get better now and they should as they cannot use all their draft assets this year and playing in the playoffs will be immeasurably better for their development than another season with nothing to play for in May/June.

The Spurs have 4 potential 1st round draft picks and 2 second rounders in the upcoming 2025 draft. Their own, ATL pick, CHI pick protected 1-10 and CHA pick protected 1-14 (resolves to 2 second rounders after this year). There is no way the Spurs could deal with more than 2 first rounders this year (own pick and ATL), they hope the Bulls are bad enough so the pick does not convey and transfers to next year and based on current performance, there is no way the CHA pick conveys.

Therefore, the Spurs should trade the CHA pick (probably 2 second rounders) which is unlikely that any other team will trade for a future first. Using that pick (and potentially one of the SAS/ATL picks based on the prize) and the contracts of Collins/Keldon/Melachi/(maybe even Vassell for a star wing) and pick up a scoring wing and a backup C more in the mould of a rim protector and rebounder. Also the Spurs have a bucket of second rounders which they should be cashing in on.

So without compromising their future, the Spurs can make a run for the playoffs, get crucial playoff experience, get better insight into who is a real building block for the future and clear up some capspace / redundant pieces.

[One_and_Done]

This thread is asking what the Spurs need in terms of trades. I don't think coming in here and saying that they don't really need anything for the direction they want to go is actually off topic. It's actually perfectly valid to have a conservative view on the Spurs doing trades and to be willing to express that sentiment in threads discussing that topic. This board is not an echo chamber; we can disagree on the conceit of the discussion just as we can on various points.

I don't think the Spurs should be looking at the trade market right now. They are finally getting close to having their full rotation again. It would be really nice if they could see it in action and where a healthy version of their squad stacks up before making moves. If they're in a position to make a playoff push in five or six weeks, then it makes sense to pounce. Otherwise, they might eventually trade away Paul if someone comes calling or would just go into the summer with their squad.

A lot of Spurs fans are excited about the Paul, Castle, Champagnie, Barnes, Wembanyama starting unit and think the Spurs' future might be in having a similar unit on the floor. I don't agree with that at all and think the team needs to incorporate a second high-volume scorer into that unit to stabilize the flow of the offense. It doesn't HAVE to happen this year, but getting some offense-oriented two-guard to replace Champ in the first unit could make sense. If Vassell and Sochan are going to be bench players for the next two years, then they don't need Johnson. Trading him and Jones for McCollum isn't ideal, because Jones should have an expanding role with Paul's aging and Castle playing as a wing.

The most elegant thing to do is to just start Vassell and bring Champ off the bench with Jones, Johnson and Sochan. But Devin does have a nice sixth-man game. Maybe Johnson can replace Champ, but I don't know that removing a three-and-D guy for a shorter guy who's shaky at both makes more sense. That's all the more reason to hold for a bit longer to see if those factors can work themselves out. They might find more success playing the clean-up role off later movement rather than being the initiators anyway.

Aside from these excellent points, it's also important to note that trades are hedged by reality. The Spurs are a very conservative organisation. They don't make alot of trades period. They, like alot of teams, recognise that if you miss training camp then it can be tough to integrate new pieces. That means midseason trades are even less likely.

It's obviously not what most people here want to hear, because this is the trade board and not the 'stay the course' board, but unless the trades are going to be divorced from all reality then it's usually going to be on the money to say 'Spurs aren't going to do that'.