SAS/MIL/PHX - wingSpan Antonio

[One_and_Done]

Aint nobody in history said “trade me to San Antonio”

Fox literally just did.

Fox just wasn’t extending with Sacramento

He specifically asked for a trade to SA.

[wemby]

Aint nobody in history said “trade me to San Antonio”

Fox literally just did.

Fox just wasn’t extending with Sacramento

But he just did what you literally said nobody in history said. Take the L with dignity and move on.

[JayMKE]

Fox literally just did.

Fox just wasn’t extending with Sacramento

But he just did what you literally said nobody in history said. Take the L with dignity.

Google says he didn’t request a trade so according to google i win

[wemby]

Fox just wasn’t extending with Sacramento

But he just did what you literally said nobody in history said. Take the L with dignity.

Google says he didn’t request a trade so according to google i win

Fox > Google
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/279576/DeAaron-Fox-There-Was-No-Trade-List-There-Was-Only-Spurs
"There was no f---ing list," Fox said. "There was one team. I wanted to go to San Antonio. So, a lot of people are mad at me, saying I handcuffed the team by giving them a destination. Well, this is my career. If anybody else is in my position, you'd do the same thing. It's not my job to help build your team. I'm not about to just go where they want me to go. I wanted to have a destination."

[One_and_Done]

Then they can kick rocks, you are off your rocker, sir.

Are the Spurs in some kind of hurry I am not aware of?

Absolutely not. Wemby's window is open right now, and open for hopefully a decade plus.

I'm saying if you don't want to pay the piper for Giannis, you can kick rocks.

I feel like you need to take a step back and look at this more rationally. Go back a week. The Spurs didn’t even have the #2 pick, yet the Spurs were still one of the favoured destinations for Giannis. So how could it be feasible to trade Giannis to the Spurs before they had the #2 pick, but now that they have it suddenly it is mandatory that it be included. It’s not a logical way of approaching the issue.

If the Spurs get Giannis I don’t doubt they’ll be throwing in a lot of draft capital. Even with leverage, that’s going to happen. But I can’t see how it would make sense to throw in a #2 pick that looks very likely to yield a future star who might be better than Giannis in 4 years. A young team like the Spurs isn’t going to do something that crazy to get a 30 year old when they aren’t ready to contend yet, and a week ago nobody expected them to. On the plus side, the Spurs have a lot of other very good picks available, the same ones people expected them to include a week ago in any Giannis package. All that’s changed is they no longer have the #8 to throw in, but I’m pretty sure they can bridge that gap with one of their other future picks.

[RiotPunch]

Are the Spurs in some kind of hurry I am not aware of?

Absolutely not. Wemby's window is open right now, and open for hopefully a decade plus.

I'm saying if you don't want to pay the piper for Giannis, you can kick rocks.

I feel like you need to take a step back and look at this more rationally. Go back a week. The Spurs didn’t even have the #2 pick, yet the Spurs were still one of the favoured destinations for Giannis. So how could it be feasible to trade Giannis to the Spurs before they had the #2 pick, but now that they have it suddenly it is mandatory that it be included. It’s not a logical way of approaching the issue.

If the Spurs get Giannis I don’t doubt they’ll be throwing in a lot of draft capital. Even with leverage, that’s going to happen. But I can’t see how it would make sense to throw in a #2 pick that looks very likely to yield a future star who might be better than Giannis in 4 years. A young team like the Spurs isn’t going to do something that crazy to get a 30 year old when they aren’t ready to contend yet, and a week ago nobody expected them to. On the plus side, the Spurs have a lot of other very good picks available, the same ones people expected them to include a week ago in any Giannis package. All that’s changed is they no longer have the #8 to throw in, but I’m pretty sure they can bridge that gap with one of their other future picks.

I don't really buy San Antonio being a legitimate favorite for Giannis before landing #2. Media pushing it and Vegas odds doesn't make it real-- it's just everyone wanting to make Wemby/Giannis a thing. Bucks would have no interest in Fox or Vassell, so you're looking at a deal like Castle+Sochan+filler+picks which isn't getting you to the finish line, IMO. Adding #2 makes it a call worth taking for Milwaukee.

I also kinda disagree with the notion that Dylan Harper is a likely a future star. It's possible, but far from a sure thing. An MVP in his prime is a sure thing.

Seems like we'll have to agree to disagree on some things, which is fine.

[One_and_Done]

Absolutely not. Wemby's window is open right now, and open for hopefully a decade plus.

I'm saying if you don't want to pay the piper for Giannis, you can kick rocks.

I feel like you need to take a step back and look at this more rationally. Go back a week. The Spurs didn’t even have the #2 pick, yet the Spurs were still one of the favoured destinations for Giannis. So how could it be feasible to trade Giannis to the Spurs before they had the #2 pick, but now that they have it suddenly it is mandatory that it be included. It’s not a logical way of approaching the issue.

If the Spurs get Giannis I don’t doubt they’ll be throwing in a lot of draft capital. Even with leverage, that’s going to happen. But I can’t see how it would make sense to throw in a #2 pick that looks very likely to yield a future star who might be better than Giannis in 4 years. A young team like the Spurs isn’t going to do something that crazy to get a 30 year old when they aren’t ready to contend yet, and a week ago nobody expected them to. On the plus side, the Spurs have a lot of other very good picks available, the same ones people expected them to include a week ago in any Giannis package. All that’s changed is they no longer have the #8 to throw in, but I’m pretty sure they can bridge that gap with one of their other future picks.

I don't really buy San Antonio being a legitimate favorite for Giannis before landing #2. Media pushing it and Vegas odds doesn't make it real-- it's just everyone wanting to make Wemby/Giannis a thing. Bucks would have no interest in Fox or Vassell, so you're looking at a deal like Castle+Sochan+filler+picks which isn't getting you to the finish line, IMO. Adding #2 makes it a call worth taking for Milwaukee.

I also kinda disagree with the notion that Dylan Harper is a likely a future star. It's possible, but far from a sure thing. An MVP in his prime is a sure thing.

Seems like we'll have to agree to disagree on some things, which is fine.

MVP in his prime is misleading, because Giannis has already slipped a little (on D especially) and he's 30. It's unlikely he is still a serious MVP candidate in 3-4 years.

I don't even think Giannis is going anywhere btw, but this idea the #2 has to be included doesn't make much sense. It's not how the leverage of a trade demand happens.

[Mr Puddles]

Giannis has high value in a vacuum. We're discussing the unlikely scenario of him demanding a trade. Once that happens, it obviously changes what he's worth. If Giannis was locked up for 5 years it would obviously be different.

Even in this unlikely scenario, he would command incredible value. Rockets/Thunder/Spurs bidding war. How are the Spurs closing that deal without including #2?

It's not a bidding war if Giannis says 'trade me here'.

Just because Giannis indicates a trade preference doesn't mean the trade now becomes "one of the best players of the best decade in his prime for non of our best of assets".

Plenty of players in the past have indicated a trade preference, plenty teams have still paid a pretty penny to acquire those players.

[jakecronus8]

I feel like you need to take a step back and look at this more rationally. Go back a week. The Spurs didn’t even have the #2 pick, yet the Spurs were still one of the favoured destinations for Giannis. So how could it be feasible to trade Giannis to the Spurs before they had the #2 pick, but now that they have it suddenly it is mandatory that it be included. It’s not a logical way of approaching the issue.

If the Spurs get Giannis I don’t doubt they’ll be throwing in a lot of draft capital. Even with leverage, that’s going to happen. But I can’t see how it would make sense to throw in a #2 pick that looks very likely to yield a future star who might be better than Giannis in 4 years. A young team like the Spurs isn’t going to do something that crazy to get a 30 year old when they aren’t ready to contend yet, and a week ago nobody expected them to. On the plus side, the Spurs have a lot of other very good picks available, the same ones people expected them to include a week ago in any Giannis package. All that’s changed is they no longer have the #8 to throw in, but I’m pretty sure they can bridge that gap with one of their other future picks.

I don't really buy San Antonio being a legitimate favorite for Giannis before landing #2. Media pushing it and Vegas odds doesn't make it real-- it's just everyone wanting to make Wemby/Giannis a thing. Bucks would have no interest in Fox or Vassell, so you're looking at a deal like Castle+Sochan+filler+picks which isn't getting you to the finish line, IMO. Adding #2 makes it a call worth taking for Milwaukee.

I also kinda disagree with the notion that Dylan Harper is a likely a future star. It's possible, but far from a sure thing. An MVP in his prime is a sure thing.

Seems like we'll have to agree to disagree on some things, which is fine.

MVP in his prime is misleading, because Giannis has already slipped a little (on D especially)

Wow man. Just wow. I don’t even know where to begin.

[Ron Swanson]

Absolutely wild to suggest the Spurs have any shot at Giannis without giving up #2 and Castle, let alone including neither. Yet another Giannis trade where I have no idea why a 3rd team is getting involved though. If Spurs want KD too then they can find another team to facilitate it because that’s not Milwaukee’s problem. A straight forward Giannis for Castle, #2, #14, Atlanta picks, and salary filler (Keldon, Barnes) makes much more sense here.

[One_and_Done]

Absolutely wild to suggest the Spurs have any shot at Giannis without giving up #2 and Castle, let alone including neither. Yet another Giannis trade where I have no idea why a 3rd team is getting involved though. If Spurs want KD too then they can find another team to facilitate it because that’s not Milwaukee’s problem. A straight forward Giannis for Castle, #2, #14, Atlanta picks, and salary filler (Keldon, Barnes) makes much more sense here.

Spurs would have to offer Castle for Giannis. I don't think they need the #2 pick to make a deal, and nor did everyone else a week ago when they didn't have it.

[buckboy]

Lol at #2 not being involved.

It's a **** offer with #2(pardon the pun), let alone with out it.

[One_and_Done]

Lol at #2 not being involved.

It's a **** offer with #2(pardon the pun), let alone with out it.

You remind me of Kings fans before Fox was traded.

[buckboy]

Lol at #2 not being involved.

It's a **** offer with #2(pardon the pun), let alone with out it.

You remind me of Kings fans before Fox was traded.

Yeah cool.

It's a completely idiotic notion.

[WhatsaTDot]

Not for Giannis, you don't.

If Giannis does leave, which I doubt, he's forcing his way out of town. In that scenario Spurs can keep #2 and Fox.

There is absolutely ZERO world in which San Antonio is trading for Giannis that does not involve the second overall pick.

Didn't prime Kevin Love net the Wolves the #1 pick? Surely the Spurs are willing to give up #2 and more.

[One_and_Done]

If Giannis does leave, which I doubt, he's forcing his way out of town. In that scenario Spurs can keep #2 and Fox.

There is absolutely ZERO world in which San Antonio is trading for Giannis that does not involve the second overall pick.

Didn't prime Kevin Love net the Wolves the #1 pick? Surely the Spurs are willing to give up #2 and more.

Different contexts. The Cavs were trying to win a title that year, and made a bad trade to placate Lebron who had them over a barrell. It was also a weaker draft. If it was the #2 from last year then they should definitely throw it in.

[Chinook]

I think it might help to understand that the answer to the question, "Will the Bucks trade Giannis?" has basically nothing to do with how good the trade packages are. It has much, much more to do with the internal politics of the team. By the time the Bucks were actually taking calls on Giannis they would have decided they are definitely trading him. They would have already exhausted every option to keep him, and the threat of "if you don't give us everything we want, we'll just keep him," won't hold any power.

So I think it might help fans to come into these threads committed to trading Giannis. In real life, we don't know what's going to happen. He might want to stay, or the Bucks might be able to change his mind. Entertaining trades in good faith doesn't make it more likely that he gets dealt, and it doesn't mean you are giving him on him staying. It just means that you're participating in the game this board is built on.

No team is going to give "everything they have" for Giannis, because the Bucks are proof that Giannis without a good team around him means both no titles and a player who's likely to jump ship. At least the Bucks have the momentum from incumbency to help their chances to re-signing him. Houston, OKC, Cleveland or Brooklyn would only have Bird rights on their side. LAC with PG had the luxury of two guys from the area who specifically wanted to play together and who were willing to sign long term. Even then, they made a trade they would end up regretting.

I think One and Done's point is much stronger than it's being given credit for in this thread. If the Spurs were going to be able to trade for Giannis without having the second-overall pick before, then them having it now means it can't be a deal-breaker for Milwaukee. If it gets to this point in negotiations, Milwaukee is trying to make the best trade they can both in terms of assets they receive and political points they can earn. Maybe that trade isn't with the Spurs (and as I've made clear, I hope it isn't), but then it would be with someone else. I'd ask that fans who've been heretofore unwilling to seriously consider a trade package to actually ask themselves what those packages would be in a scenario where keeping Giannis was 100-percent no longer an option. Then I'd ask for them to take those packages and present them on this board to see how other folks view them.

[JayMKE]

I think it might help to understand that the answer to the question, "Will the Bucks trade Giannis?" has basically nothing to do with how good the trade packages are. It has much, much more to do with the internal politics of the team. By the time the Bucks were actually taking calls on Giannis they would have decided they are definitely trading him. They would have already exhausted every option to keep him, and the threat of "if you don't give us everything we want, we'll just keep him," won't hold any power.

So I think it might help fans to come into these threads committed to trading Giannis. In real life, we don't know what's going to happen. He might want to stay, or the Bucks might be able to change his mind. Entertaining trades in good faith doesn't make it more likely that he gets dealt, and it doesn't mean you are giving him on him staying. It just means that you're participating in the game this board is built on.

No team is going to give "everything they have" for Giannis, because the Bucks are proof that Giannis without a good team around him means both no titles and a player who's likely to jump ship. At least the Bucks have the momentum from incumbency to help their chances to re-signing him. Houston, OKC, Cleveland or Brooklyn would only have Bird rights on their side. LAC with PG had the luxury of two guys from the area who specifically wanted to play together and who were willing to sign long term. Even then, they made a trade they would end up regretting.

I think One and Done's point is much stronger than it's being given credit for in this thread. If the Spurs were going to be able to trade for Giannis without having the second-overall pick before, then them having it now means it can't be a deal-breaker for Milwaukee. If it gets to this point in negotiations, Milwaukee is trying to make the best trade they can both in terms of assets they receive and political points they can earn. Maybe that trade isn't with the Spurs (and as I've made clear, I hope it isn't), but then it would be with someone else. I'd ask that fans who've been heretofore unwilling to seriously consider a trade package to actually ask themselves what those packages would be in a scenario where keeping Giannis was 100-percent no longer an option. Then I'd ask for them to take those packages and present them on this board to see how other folks view them.

too long, summarize it. Spurs were being talked about with all their picks before moving up too it just was the #8 pick then and you guys were trying to say no to Castle then. It’s just lowballing, wanting something for nothing, don’t dress it up as anything else.

Considering I don’t like the Rutgers kids, #2 is just marginal improvement and we’re past the point of talking about hypothetical value of the pick and to actually talk about the prospect at that pick. Castle is ROTY of a weak class, he seems closer to a Michael Carter-Williams than a franchise player. I look forward to the Spurs saddling up with the two.

The Bucks don’t control their picks until after 2030 so it’s elite assets and to bridge the gap until then. If the Bucks are going to be **** awful for the rest of the decade then it’s worth the gamble trying to keep Giannis, none of these teams being talked about as trade destinations have a prayer of signing Giannis as a free agent so if you want him you gotta pay. I would seriously rather risk Giannis walking than take a substandard return, it would be profoundly funny to see it blow up in asset collector’s faces when he goes to LA like every other superstar in history.

The Bucks can offer Giannis far more money than anybody else and next year Dame will be back and there will be more flexibility to make moves to appease him.

[luciano-davidwesley]

Take out Fox and the #2 and you've got the beginnings of a deal.

Not for Giannis, you don't.

If Giannis does leave, which I doubt, he's forcing his way out of town. In that scenario Spurs can keep #2 and Fox.

You think the Spurs could get Giannis for a late lotto pick, future first and a swap? Lol

[One_and_Done]

Not for Giannis, you don't.

If Giannis does leave, which I doubt, he's forcing his way out of town. In that scenario Spurs can keep #2 and Fox.

You think the Spurs could get Giannis for a late lotto pick, future first and a swap? Lol

The Spurs have alot of picks to trade.