THE 2019-2020 TO 2020-2021 KEEP, TRADE, LET WALK SPURS THREAD

[G R E Y]

I was thinking about our transition situation, and about how it can expand with some tweaks. Whereas the half-court game worked well last season, this season we were between a half-court and transition-oriented game, and these at times didn't gel well together. Between DJ getting acclimated back to the starter's role (both half-court set while balancing it with pushing the pace at times) and new starter Trey growing-by-fire, it was just enough learning to put us a bit behind where we left off last season rather than pick up where we left off.

There's only so much Pop could do in terms of accommodating players (DJ along with DD and LM) while balancing it with having others earn their minutes (LW, KJ) and others still learn the system as they played in it (Trey). With some tweaks, vets can still have important roles but with a smoother incorporation of roles for the younger group as we move to a system that integrates them more. I think this is something we have been shifting towards - leaning on vets as young guys develop - and can showcase younger guys and their strengths more now. It's a more versatile and fun style where sharing the ball and taking pride in defense takes precedence. I think young guys being given more responsibility allows Pop to teach more, make plays for strengths of more players, and cater less to styles that star vets prefer but which may not be optimal for the team we've been growing to become going forward.

We needed a reliable second scoring option beside LMA, but with DD also preferring the half-court game, playing other styles more - more transition, movement-oriented rather than what ended at times with ISOing - was secondary. You play to the hand of the best scoring options so I can see the reasoning, but we do have another year of young guys developing. The good thing is that it has kept us afloat more or less and we can now raise the floor of our level of play with our young players who are one year further along in their development in the fundamentals of our system.

We sorely need to regain our defensive prowess. Our defensive rating was 25th this season. Even though our O was 11th, several players underperformed, and given our defensive challenges, they needed to at least have matched last season's efficiency and output to give ourselves a bigger cushion.

I think LMA and DD are still desirable for teams that need extra juice, and given the cap drop, that their contracts are relatively affordable and short (nothing in the dreaded $30+M for multiple years range), is actually a plus for us should we go the trade route with either.

We're in the bottom third in the league in terms of average team age, which may or may not mean something - it's who is the oldest, and in our case, LMA, Beli, Rudy, DD, and Patty. These are key contributors:
- Each was in top 10 in minutes per game
- Four of five (not Beli) averaged double digit scoring (top ten on team) per game
- Four of the five (not Beli) averaged at least 20% usage (top six on team)
- Four of five (not Beli) were in the top five FT attempts per game (team rank 18th)
- All five were in top ten FGAs per game (although this is highly skewed because LMA and DD each averaged 15, the only two in double digits - Patty 9.1, Rudy 8.4, Beli 5.2)
- Three of five (Patty 4th, LMA 8th, DD 9th) were in the top ten in eFG%

- Crucially, four of five are in the top five in 3FGAs per game (guess who's not? lol), but the sweet spot between numbers of attempts and makes is off - LMA is 4th at 38.9% (3 attempts per game); Patty is 7th at 38% (6.2 attempts); Beli is 9th at 36.8% (3 attempts); Rudy 11th at 31.4% (3 attempts); DD is 12th at an eye-watering 26.7% on a hair-pulling 0.5 attempts behind the arc per game.

So, big disparity between our top two players in this category, Patty is about right where he should be for his role, and Beli and Rudy noticeably underperformed. But there was disparity as a team as well; we were 28th in the league in 3FGAs at 28.7 per game, but 7th in efficiency at 37.1%.

Equally crucially, we were 3rd in 2FGAs at 60.8 per game, but 22nd in efficiency at 51.7%. And we ranked 18th in the league at getting to the FT line with 22.8FTAs per game even as we ranked 2nd in efficiency at 80.9%.

So the things we're impressively efficient at we didn't do nearly enough of, and the things that were the main thrust of our O we weren't nearly as efficient at as we needed to be. Out of balance. Couple it with bad D, two new starters, and less efficient shooting from shooters and it made for the inconsistency we saw throughout the season.

These are broad brush strokes and context matters. Still, MPG and usage especially show the obvious that we rely on vets, but also I think we're not necessarily getting the most out of other guys when LMA and DD operate so much and so much at half court which brings me back to the point of broadening our versatility and raising the floor with incorporating more of our two-way players. And for the love of Spurs basketball, better defense.

We need more balance between D and O as well as 2s and 3s. While I fully appreciate that we tried to do just that last summer, the results should remind that character (and lack of it) matters (MM) and well, I don't know how DC dropped off so badly from being a serviceable player, but he even got DNPs in Houston where all he had to do was run out to the sides and wait to shoot. I don't know how we could have known he was so bad. Players get tested with physicals, but do they work out with a prospective team? Wright has some pressure on him to have a better off-season.

Back to adjustments available to us, if we pull back a bit on the half-court game and 2s a little more and put up some more 3s (we made a concerted effort at it in the new year where 30 attempts was the goal) while getting playing time for better defenders, we can better balance out what we've done with what we are capable and should do more of. And we have the options with which to do it. Most answers are on the team and after more experience this year I think they will be ready for bigger roles next season, others are worth exploring via trade or FA. We don't need a huge star to raise the floor, but consistency in 3&D is crucial. We don't need a huge shift and follow the 3-on-steroids trend either, but we have an opportunity to better balance out and match our strengths in efficiency with a system that increases scoring attempts in them while defending better.

Jakob can be incorporated on O more even as he needs to expand his passing and shot range (and, of course, FT accuracy); KJ (smallest of sample sizes, so caveat, but he's so eager) showed great flashes, and efficient, too. They along with DJ, DW, LWIV need to take a step forward - again, not huge leaps, but we need to explore the LMA cog with more scoring-by-committee of several of the younger guys who have learned our sets and have grown defensively responsible.

Even with DD likely opting in, trading him is optimal - he will want to keep showcasing his game, and in a contract year, asking him to step back his game won't likely go over well. We already know his play does not mesh well with the type of game that makes us a multi-pronged threat. (I suspect he was asked to be more of a facilitator and he ended up taking 1-2 shots per half post-AS - totally passive aggressive response there. Maybe he was going through something, but this dip happens every year. Every year). As much as DD has been a stabilizing force and has eased the scoring pressure off of LMA, I think Pop, as much as he respects DD as a person, will be relieved not to cater to DD's game. It's helped but also hindered us, and with other guys more ready to step in, we'll be playing a faster more dangerous style.

Keeping LMA until at least the February deadline (hopefully we will have addressed the 4/5 via FA and/or draft and/or trade) means he would be a feature of our O but not as much as he was in years past. Hopefully he's on board about being kept fresh as he gets older. I'd rather not lose him for nothing, but if we can't swing a deadline trade that works for us, he's still a good 3&D player it's just we can't rely him and Rudy at the 4/5 positions as we have previously.

The main thrust of this post is to make a slight shift in our style of play, and given that we have the young guys coming up seasoned in our system and that they're all two-way versatile players who defend, we can do it next season without a great wholesale changes to the team. If we move on from DD and LMA one at a time that transition to a style of play that stats say we are efficient at, we can do it smoothly while remaining competitive with guys familiar with what Pop wants from them and with Pop not having to be limited to the half-court demands of two main players nearly as much. Having something to play for and giving more guys a bigger stake while remaining competitive is primary. I think the shift to a more equitable system will be freeing for Pop and the players alike, playing a style for which we've been developing players and working towards being able to play.

[G R E Y]

Some interesting stats have emerged with respect to our young guys and vets. Some are on the money, others are quite surprising in terms of discrepancy between the eye test and the stats behind them.

As to the former, no surprise that DJ and Derrick are in the 98% and 97% respectively (3rd and 4th) on the list of time guarding all star players. Phenomenal. And to think we are just scratching the surface of both!

Definite keepers, both:

Read on Twitter

[G R E Y]

I have been forthright about being outright put off with LMA's pining for his former team while on our payroll, so these stats are encouraging.

And while I long thought we have needed him to win, it turns out that many stats show guys around him fare better when he's not on the court. We do win more with him than without, but I suspect that is also a function of sets that cater to his game, and so the quick adjustment without him in the lineup takes some getting used to.

This article shows some key stats that shift perceptions of LMA's impact on other players:

The Problem With LaMarcus Aldridge

Here’s what stands out the most: the Spurs have worse performance with Aldridge in lineups using nine of the top 11 players in minutes.

Spurs Net ratings With/Without LaMarcus Aldridge
Player With Aldridge Without Aldridge Differential
Bryn Forbes -4.1 -12.8 8.7
DeMar DeRozan -2.7 -1.2 -1.5
Dejounte Murray -5.1 -4.6 -0.5
Lonnie Walker -12.6 4.7 -17.3
Marco Belinelli 0.3 3.7 -3.4
Trey Lyles -3.3 0.4 -3.7
DeMarre Carroll 10.5 5 5.5
Derrick White -2.4 3 -5.4
Jakob Poeltl -9.1 5.4 -14.5
Patty Mills -0.14 8.3 -8.44
Rudy Gay -4.3 2.2 -6.5

A positive number in the differential column means the team is better with Aldridge on court, a negative number means they are worse with Aldridge on-court.

When you dig deeper, this becomes the key metric to watch for. Here’s defensive rating for Spurs rotation players with and without Aldridge:

Spurs Defensive Rating With/Without LaMarcus Aldridge
Player With Aldridge Without Aldridge Differential
Bryn Forbes 113 117.1 4.1
DeMar DeRozan 112.6 114.1 1.5
Dejounte Murray 113.3 112.6 -0.7
Lonnie Walker 114.6 105.6 -9
Marco Belinelli 108 107.8 -0.2
Trey Lyles 114.5 110.6 -3.9
DeMarre Carroll 108.7 99 -9.7
Derrick White 109.9 106.7 -3.2
Jakob Poeltl 118.9 107.2 -11.7
Patty Mills 112.4 104.3 -8.1
Rudy Gay 108.7 106.7 -2

In this instance, a positive number means the defense is better (gives up fewer points per 100 possessions) with Aldridge on-court, a negative number means the defense gives up more points with Aldridge on-court....

Now, the mistake people make is looking at these numbers and thinking the data says Aldridge is a bad defender. And if you’ve watched his career, you know that at this point, he’s a really good defender. So the numbers must be wrong, right?

Well, no. Because you’re inferring what the numbers are telling you. The numbers aren’t telling you anything about Aldridge’s individual defense. What they are telling you is that, for whatever reason, the Spurs defend at a better rate and therefore outscore their opponent by more with Aldridge off the floor.

There are other numbers that stand out, like transition. The Spurs rank 30th in the league in transition defense, per Synergy Sports. With Aldridge on-court, they give up 114.3 points per 100 possessions in transition. That gets worse with Aldridge on the bench and DeRozan on. But here’s the kicker: with neither one on-court they give up just 105.4.

To put this in English: the Spurs with either DeRozan, or Aldridge on-court get run off the floor. With neither on, they do a pretty good job. Sure, the fact that they are playing starters vs. the other players playing bench matters, but bear in mind the fluidity of the Spurs’ rotations....

Here’s what doesn’t make sense: if it’s not Aldridge’s fault, then why are they so much better without him in this regard? You can chalk up a marginal improvement or even a substantial one to playing bench rotations.

But the kind of improvement you see across the board suggests that, for whatever reason, the Spurs simply play better without Aldridge. Finally, there’s the first quarter issue. The Spurs started in a hole for much of the season with Aldridge on the floor. The Spurs were outscored in Aldridge’s first-quarter minutes in 29 of the team’s 53 games....

The Spurs are always a process-over-results team first and foremost. They play the right way, or at least whatever Popovich has determined is the right way. A key part of Aldridge’s absence is that they are much more likely to play fast, move the ball, and take more 3’s.

They didn’t take more 3’s with Aldridge off-court this season, but with Aldridge gone, they have a chance to redefine their identity and play to their strengths, something they have not done since Aldridge was signed as a free agent years ago (despite their tremendous success).

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nba/spurs-odds-nba-playoffs-betting-lamarcus-aldridge-injury?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mattmoore

While I'd love it if we adjusted so much as to break out and run our D-to-transition and movement game, I suspect it will be more of an adjustment on the young guys without LMA. Still, I welcome the chance for the young guys to prove themselves more, even if there are some bumps along the way.

Stats have room for interpretation and context, but many Spurs fans are hungry for the young guys to get bigger roles - as do the players themselves. We've catered to the two mid-rangers for two + years now, and I think the young guys are chomping at the bit to show what they can do. We have had a collision of styles between mid-range / half-court of the vets and the transition / run and passing style of the younger group, and now we are almost forced into pushing the latter more. It's funny how circumstances thrust change. Good thing we've been developing the young players from D out, learning the half court sets while also growing their style on the second unit. It's time we show more of it and see where we go from here forward. Looking forward to it.

[G R E Y]

Trey without LMA in recent games:

Read on Twitter

Wow. Keeper. Maybe not starter material, but thinking back to where he started with us at the beginning of the season, he's come a long way. Trey tends to defer with LMA there, but when thrust into doing more without LMA, he shows an aptitude for stepping up. More assertive Trey is good Trey.

[G R E Y]

And finally, Lonnie is obviously a keeper, but for those frustrated by the development path he has been on, the results speak to it being right all along. He's been put into games late for defensive purposes - big responsibility - and has shown better results on O as well. With more consistency and gelling with the other young guys, he's going to be special:

Read on Twitter

[G R E Y]

It is now just after midnight on Saturday, October 17, 2020. We should therefore soon know whether DeMar chooses to opt in:

Read on Twitter

[imagump1313]

It is now just after midnight on Saturday, October 17, 2020. We should therefore soon know whether DeMar chooses to opt in:

Read on Twitter

Praying he doesn't but I'm afraid we are screwed

Since next season will be an asterisk year again anyway, it really doesn't matter though. As long as we don't do something totally stupid like extend him we will be ok.

[G R E Y]

It is now just after midnight on Saturday, October 17, 2020. We should therefore soon know whether DeMar chooses to opt in:

Read on Twitter

Praying he doesn't but I'm afraid we are screwed

Since next season will be an asterisk year again anyway, it really doesn't matter though. As long as we don't do something totally stupid like extend him we will be ok.

Honestly in terms of asset retention I hope he does opt in. Bubble play still leaves me with a glow even as I realize that DeMar as the starting 4 is not a pragmatic regular solution. Nevertheless, it gives us another option to throw at unsuspecting teams and I like the balance of his passing and young guys getting experience executing.

I think extending him does depend on the terms (and that's reportedly long been the crux as DD wants length the Spurs are balking at), but now that we're on the cusp of a huge 2021 cap space, and with the young guys having another season of experience coming up, we will be primed for targeting FA players who will suit them.

I appreciate what DeMar brings to our locker room and despite its holes, many aspects of his game. IF we got him on a team-friendly discount and IF he were willing to take on a more supportive role akin to what we saw in the bubble, and IF it didn't get in the way of our 2021 FA targets, then ok, re-sign him.

Otherwise, whether we keep him or trade him, I hope we get to decide that with his opt-in. We can always do a S&T with another team after the upcoming season. Continuity while the young guys grow more is important.

[jayu70]

It is now just after midnight on Saturday, October 17, 2020. We should therefore soon know whether DeMar chooses to opt in:

Read on Twitter

Did DeRozan pick up his option?
Are the Spurs planning to keep him if he does?

[G R E Y]

It is now just after midnight on Saturday, October 17, 2020. We should therefore soon know whether DeMar chooses to opt in:

Read on Twitter

Did DeRozan pick up his option?
Are the Spurs planning to keep him if he does?

The opt-in date seems to be TBD as the NBA-NBPA is still renegotiating the CBA, so we don't know either way yet. As to what we do if he does opt-in, we will either trade him in the off-season, or keep him for the season and hopefully work out a S&T to a destination of his choice.

We almost never trade in-season so that's why those options seem more likely, and the team and DD seem to be apart on length of a re-sign so that's why it seems likely that at some point we part ways.

Appreciate all DD has brought, especially leadership and stability when we needed it, as well as a good vet presence for the young guys, but we can't handcuff ourselves on a long-term deal with DD and compromise the 2021 cap space we've been carefully preserving.

[G R E Y]

So while we wait for these dates to be firmed up, some thoughts on what I think we should do with each player:

Derrick: we need to re-sign him this off-season. He flat out balled in the bubble, reminiscent of his playoff level versus Denver last season. Poised, assertive, smart, and always making a good defensive play. Does this impact our 2021 cap? I think it's worth the hit not to wait till next season and have someone potentially swoop him up. If we can keep Derrick to around $14-$15M/4 years it would be a steal.

Drew: played well enough in the bubble that I think we pick up his $1.5M or there about option. We need the big backups to do what he does - play tough, know our system, stay within his role, grab boards, and score some.

I have a theory that because both got engaged this summer, it's a sign that we're retaining them both. Just a hunch that they know they'll have the job security and contracts to have made the plunge. Congratulations to both couples!

Beli: of course my theory flies out the window here because he got married a few weeks ago. He's been showing video snippets of working out with Spurs gear, and he wrote "Once a Spur, always a Spur" on a thank you post for the flowers and bottle of bubbly the Spurs sent in honour of their nuptials. He played to his strengths in the bubble - making shots, moving well without the ball, but I'd be surprised if we retain his services. I wouldn't be dead set against it, but it would have to be in a reduced role solely for vet presence and a bench scoring punch; odds are he doesn't have another shooting stinker of a season. Bubble Beli didn't see a shot he didn't like. Sort of stood out. Not always in a good way, but he sure stepped into his role. Is a reduced role one he'd want? A small one year deal I'd be ok with, but after that, we have 2021 cap space with which to maneuver.

Bryn: thigh injury kept him out and we scored at a strong pace (9th in the bubble) and made our 3s. Derrick pouring it on from beyond the arc may not be sustainable for an entire season, but it sure expands our options and distributes the load. I think Bryn's poor shooting season had something to do with pressure of impending FA status, plus once you have a good shooting season, teams prepare for you more, so as a starter it was challenging for him to replicate the previous season's efficiency. There were some whispers that Bryn was held out to make sure he wouldn't damage his FA status, and that's ok. I don't doubt he tweaked something, but it gave the younger guys more responsibility to show how they'd progressed. We know what we have with Bryn, and Pop said the guys on the court were playing for their positions for next season, so that's fine, it was a win-win.

I do think we re-sign Bryn, but to a team-friendly deal and for a bench role as his efficiency dropped noticeably this season and he struggled against other starters, especially defensively. It couldn't have been lost on him how much better our D was with a DJ-Derrick back court and with Derrick hitting 3s at both a higher rate (for him) and better accuracy (compared to Bryn). In a way, a benefit of his struggles this season is it will help get him at a more reasonable price.

Jakob: hard to gauge the market for him as he's tremendous defensively, but for all his impact on that end, he's limited on O. His poor FT shooting is a concern, and his more traditional big game is not where the league is headed. These should work in our favour in terms of coming to terms on a reasonable contract. He wants a bigger role and got the chance to show what he can do in the bubble. Our front court is in transition and right now he's an important part of that. It's smart to retain him as an asset, but we do need to bolster the position over time, the goal being having impactful players on both ends. Is around $12M/4 years a fair deal?

LMA: Let's say Gordon Hayward opts in ($34+M!). Would we want to trade LMA ($24M+15% trade kicker) for GH and one of Boston's late first rounders? That's assuming their contracts are within the acceptable trade range, if not, throw in, say, a retained Metu. They score around the same number of PPG at a similar efficiency and usage rate.

LMA rebounds more, GH passes more, each fills a need now for the new team: we need a true 3 who moves well without the ball, is a decent defender, can pass and score (drive and 3) to fill in for a year while we develop a hopefully drafted-by-Spurs Patrick Williams, and Cs need stronger front court talent to bang with the bigs of the Eastern conference who can stretch the floor with the 3, too. We get the pick for taking on the player with the bigger contract and with some injury history.

Now even though bubble play showed we can play a much more uptempo game without LMA and can still score and defend well, we would need to shore up the front court. Someone on twitter suggested taking a run at Baynes, and given he's a UFA coming off a $5.4M contract, I think he's a reasonable target. He's a formidable presence down low who can box out, rebound, and hit the occasional 3.

So that's

DJ/Derrick (1,2)/Patty/maybe Q if we retain him
Lonnie/DD? (2,3 some 4 in a small-ball pinch like in the bubble)
GH/Keldon
Trey/Rudy/Luka
Jakob/Baynes/Drew

Younger, more versatile, better balanced team with more D and more scoring versatility.

Metu: I think unless we use him for a trade we don't otherwise retain him, to be honest. He looked disinterested at times on the bench in the bubble, and while I can't fault him for feeling frustrated for not getting more minutes, and while he improved in the G-League, for some reason it has not translated measurably in the minutes he got the Spurs. Nice J, better footwork, still a rebounding pogo stick, but just hasn't been able to put it all together. Is it not enough consistent minutes with the big club? Is it trying to do too much in the minutes he has played? I'm not sure, but for a second round pick with Luka and two to three other 4s ahead of him, he hasn't done enough to force us to play him more. Seems like the odd man out. I hope he gets the shot he believes he deserves.

Q: I think like Metu he had a better G-League showing than in the Spurs bubble. From the seven or eight Austin Spurs games I watched this season, Q was confident and made good decisions in terms of passing and shooting and driving. He looked like he second guessed himself in the bubble, like he didn't want to make mistakes. Whereas Metu was erratic at times, Q was hesitant. Still, when he managed to play within himself, he showed his strengths. A solid body who uses it well, experience in running teams who can defend, drive, and hit a 3 is a good bench guy to have. I think we retain him.

Trey: definite yes on bringing him back next season (has a $5.5M that's not guaranteed). Improved steadily, thrived in our system after being put in a challenging situation to start. Still needs to be more assertive though that improved as the season progressed, too. A lot of talent. Shows clips of him working out in his Spurs gear which either means he knows he's coming back or is showing he really wants to. I like it either way. It may be a small thing, but ask me the last time LMA worked out in gear with any Spurs logos on it. Yes, I'm scrutinizing and attributing meaning to chosen attire. Lacking any real inside evidence, I look for patterns players show, and this may mean something as to really wanting to be here (or not! )

Patty: team spirit leader. He isn't going anywhere. Crucial to continuity on and off the court. He embodies what we're about.

Rudy: had a resurgence in the bubble after struggling this year. Not at Beli levels, but down from the previous year. Bubble Rudy was bouncy, assertive, physical, pushed the ball, and hit some clutch shots. Has that knack for knowing when to drive or make a key play that turns the tide of the team. He, DeMar, and Patty can all do that, and increasingly Derrick is developing it. Rudy's size and skill set make him an asset for us, so unless we get a sweet deal, I like keeping him for the season, especially as mentor to Trey and Luka, especially if LMA gets traded.

Lonnie and Keldon and to a lesser extent Luka will surely get more regular minutes with the big club and will be relied on to contribute meaningfully. They're on rookie contracts and going nowhere. I think the new style of play Pop had going in the bubble takes the lead into next year. We know we can play the half court game, but it and transition style were at odds throughout the season. Everyone from Pop down to the players was energized by the influx of talent and by the transition and pace, as always D-out. It was fun to watch them all enjoy being together and playing this way. That it worked so well is something to look forward to for next season.

[Phreak50]

I'd love Baynes back. He is a banger we haven't had in a long time (we never had this new and improved version when he was originally a Spur). Plus, he hits more than just the occasional three, he hit 9 in one game!

That sort of spacing helps our guys a lot.

I don't know about Hayward though. Even with his iffy injury history, he has never been great at any one thing and while that may initially scream as being perfect for this team, it is nowhere near worth the billions on his contract. Then again if they throw in a pick or two... I think this recent Celtics run make the finals and maybe beat the Lakers with LMA at his best.

I still think our success will be dictated by Murray's performance or how soon we move on from him.

[imagump1313]

I'd be on board with Baynes. He always has been a favorite of mine. But lets be honest. He's gonna be 34 in December. One productive year in another asterisk season isn't going to help us much in the long run and I doubt he will want to sign a one year deal.

Hayward just seems like we would be spinning our wheels. I wouldn't want to extend him or DeRozan so trading him for LMA is just trading two guys no one wants on this team after 2021 anyway. Plus we would have to give up an asset(even though its a low one) just to make it work. Not worth it IMO. The extra draft pick would be awesome but seriously, if I'm Boston what would I want with Metu?

I'm kind of in the camp of just riding 2021 out unless someone knocks our socks off with a deal or we can get another draft pick. Its another altered season that will be marked with an asterisk.

We aren't going to contend no matter what we do so I'm even ok if DeRozan opts in. As long as we don't do something stupid like extend someone, all these big contracts are gone for 2022 and we can really get down to business.

[G R E Y]

Thanks for your feedback, gents.

I agree that DJ has to make a noticeable leap next season. I don't want to put number benchmarks on it because his numbers across the board were better this season. But his getting used to the starting group - like all season with the half-court game - and lacklustre performance in the transition game we switched to in the bubble was one of the reasons we struggled despite renewed optimism about the impact his D would make.

He was the sole regular season starter who played in the final bubble game. From then on I have wondered what that has been about. Maybe it's not that big a deal, but again, Pop said guys were playing for their spots next season so it's interesting that we had the longest look at him from the whole regular season starting group. Not sure that means 'something', but it stood out. Whether that means 'something' for us or for another team, we will see. At some point, we need a PG that's also a very good facilitator, and whoever that is is who I want leading our team.

My thinking about the LMA-GH trade was to get a base hit or double if we can, steps towards the goal of better balancing the team as we turn it over and remain competitive in preparation for a big swing in free agency in 2021. With GH get some value back for the season alone, not for potentially extending a player. I don't think we can acquire a player we'd want for long-term with where LMA is at this point in his career. Still, his PPG, rebounding, and 3 efficiency can help at team who needs a big right now.

We know now that we can score and defend without LMA - at least in the small bubble sample. Is that sustainable? Not sure, but I posted an article with some stats detailing his impact throughout the season and these do not show well for LMA's game. He needs the ball for a certain time in a certain way, and though he has adjusted in terms of spreading the floor with his 3s, I think GH fits a transition style better as a true 3, we make up for the scoring with LMA gone, and we get some quality front court presence at low cost in Baynes, for example, whether it's a 1 year or 1+1 year. I think players will want to position themselves for the 2021 cap as more teams will have more money to spend, and Baynes had his strongest season in PPG, rebounds, FG% and 3%. True it was in a bigger role at six more minutes per game, but he doubled his PPG in them. That said, it's a team market for bigs.

I don't know whether we'd need to throw in Metu to make the money work, but if we do, true I don't know what Cs would need him for, especially as he can't seem to find minutes for us either. Maybe they release him or see if they can flip him or find some minutes for him. It wasn't really deeply thought out to make the money work, so I concede the point, but included him to make the broader one of acquiring an asset that fits us better for the year.

Though GH's game somewhat overlaps with DD's, I think a DJ-DD-GH is far better than DJ-Bryn-DD, and I'm very curious what a DJ-Derrick-GH trio would look like. His game will be all the more important should DD opt out, or opt-in and we trade him. GH is a better defender and a better 3 shooter than DD while being a solid facilitator. Cs fans were saying they were missing his play making and ability to move the ball when their O got stagnant.

So having a scoring threat with a bigger shooting range and better D is a good get for LMA to stay competitive in a transition year to the younger group and to maintain the money available for 2021. If we end up with both GH and DD, that's even more space opening up for our cap for 2021.

[Jamaaliver]

Atlanta Hawks: Derrick White Becomes Trae Young's Bodyguard



The Trade: Atlanta Hawks acquire Derrick White from the San Antonio Spurs for Kevin Huerter.

Who doesn't love an old fashioned challenge trade?

Here, the Atlanta Hawks would secure a defender capable of handling the opposition's most dangerous backcourt opponent, shielding Trae Young from the nonstop attacks he's faced his whole career. While teams will still hunt Atlanta's high-scoring guard whenever they can, at least with White the Hawks can force them to work for the matchup they want.

White is among the NBA's best shot-blocking guards, which speaks to his length and ability to pursue ball-handlers into the lane. The San Antonio Spurs have defended better with him on the floor in each of the past two seasons, and as an added bonus, White isn't a defense-only option.

He's a career 36.4 percent shooter from deep. That's not quite in Kevin Huerter's league (38.3 percent), but White has a bit more on-ball zip, athleticism and interior scoring ability than Red Velvet.

Huerter's value to the Spurs would be in his youth and pure stroke. He's just 22, four years younger than White, and would lend offensive balance to a roster that has to compensate for DeMar DeRozan's refusal to spread the floor. His stretchy scoring would make sense for a team that already has Dejounte Murray entrenched as its defense-first point guard.

Plus, the Spurs are quietly much closer to the rebuilding stage than the Hawks. White will be due for a new deal next offseason, while Huerter is under team control through 2023. In a year, LaMarcus Aldridge and DeRozan will be gone, so Huerter's youth and upside should be of more value to San Antonio.

Bleacher Report

[imagump1313]

Spoiler:

Atlanta Hawks: Derrick White Becomes Trae Young's Bodyguard



The Trade: Atlanta Hawks acquire Derrick White from the San Antonio Spurs for Kevin Huerter.

Who doesn't love an old fashioned challenge trade?

Here, the Atlanta Hawks would secure a defender capable of handling the opposition's most dangerous backcourt opponent, shielding Trae Young from the nonstop attacks he's faced his whole career. While teams will still hunt Atlanta's high-scoring guard whenever they can, at least with White the Hawks can force them to work for the matchup they want.

White is among the NBA's best shot-blocking guards, which speaks to his length and ability to pursue ball-handlers into the lane. The San Antonio Spurs have defended better with him on the floor in each of the past two seasons, and as an added bonus, White isn't a defense-only option.

He's a career 36.4 percent shooter from deep. That's not quite in Kevin Huerter's league (38.3 percent), but White has a bit more on-ball zip, athleticism and interior scoring ability than Red Velvet.

Huerter's value to the Spurs would be in his youth and pure stroke. He's just 22, four years younger than White, and would lend offensive balance to a roster that has to compensate for DeMar DeRozan's refusal to spread the floor. His stretchy scoring would make sense for a team that already has Dejounte Murray entrenched as its defense-first point guard.

Plus, the Spurs are quietly much closer to the rebuilding stage than the Hawks. White will be due for a new deal next offseason, while Huerter is under team control through 2023. In a year, LaMarcus Aldridge and DeRozan will be gone, so Huerter's youth and upside should be of more value to San Antonio.

Bleacher Report

Interesting...
I would like to see who we are drafting before this happened though.

[G R E Y]

Spoiler:

Atlanta Hawks: Derrick White Becomes Trae Young's Bodyguard



The Trade: Atlanta Hawks acquire Derrick White from the San Antonio Spurs for Kevin Huerter.

Who doesn't love an old fashioned challenge trade?

Here, the Atlanta Hawks would secure a defender capable of handling the opposition's most dangerous backcourt opponent, shielding Trae Young from the nonstop attacks he's faced his whole career. While teams will still hunt Atlanta's high-scoring guard whenever they can, at least with White the Hawks can force them to work for the matchup they want.

White is among the NBA's best shot-blocking guards, which speaks to his length and ability to pursue ball-handlers into the lane. The San Antonio Spurs have defended better with him on the floor in each of the past two seasons, and as an added bonus, White isn't a defense-only option.

He's a career 36.4 percent shooter from deep. That's not quite in Kevin Huerter's league (38.3 percent), but White has a bit more on-ball zip, athleticism and interior scoring ability than Red Velvet.

Huerter's value to the Spurs would be in his youth and pure stroke. He's just 22, four years younger than White, and would lend offensive balance to a roster that has to compensate for DeMar DeRozan's refusal to spread the floor. His stretchy scoring would make sense for a team that already has Dejounte Murray entrenched as its defense-first point guard.

Plus, the Spurs are quietly much closer to the rebuilding stage than the Hawks. White will be due for a new deal next offseason, while Huerter is under team control through 2023. In a year, LaMarcus Aldridge and DeRozan will be gone, so Huerter's youth and upside should be of more value to San Antonio.

Bleacher Report

That's a hard no for me. True Huerter is younger and with slightly better percentage from the 3, but Derrick has comparable stats from the bench to Huerter's starting role, and in 7.5 fewer minutes per game. Also, Derick's PER and win shares are noticeably better.

It's crucial to note that Derrick guards the opponent's main or core players most of the time, and with him beside DJ in the starting role - something we've been waiting on the whole season - our D went from 25th to 9th, this against other teams fighting for the playoffs. Also, our O was humming as well, so despite missing three starters, all of whom can hit the 3 (and one whose main role it was to hit it), we didn't miss a beat in scoring. .

Read on Twitter

Derrick more than doubled his 3 attempts as a starter, this while leading the bubble with 11 charges taken. If you can indulge me quoting what I wrote in another thread about him, here are Derrick's improvements in the bubble:

As for his O, assertive Derrick returned with blazing results. In the bubble, he averaged 18.8 points, 4.3 rebounds, and 5 assists per game in the seven he played on 44.4FG%, 39.8% from 3, and 87FT% in 31. 4 minutes per game.

Compare these to pre-bubble play from October to March: 11.2 points, 3.1 rebounds, and 3.3 assists per game on 47.9FG%, 40.1% from 3, and 84.7FT% in 24.1 minutes per game.

Of course, given the extra minutes you'd expect an increase in attempts, but just how many show the impact Derrick has when focused on attacking and looking for him shot. In the bubble, he averaged 13.6FGAs, 8.4 attempts from 3, and 5.5 from the FT line.

Pre-bubble: 7.8FGAs, 2.6 attempts from 3, and 3.2 from the FT line and we see that Derrick's overall game has taken the next step.

[url]viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1979385&start=40[/url]

For the first time this season, we were in the positive both offensively and defensively.

In case anyone thinks that it's a small sample size issue, he was great versus Denver in last season's playoffs as well.

True, the bubble is a small sample size, and I don't expect DD to be the 4 for more than specific assignments, but we know we can defend well with four players around him who do it well. So we know we have more versatility with the vets and young guys should DD opt in, but if we trade him or he opts out, then we need the presence of guys who know the system well all the more. It's not all about getting younger and staying cheaper; we will do both organically through the draft and vet contracts expiring anyway.

We developed Derrick, he's improved his play and leadership - he also gets involved in community deeds and has a basketball academy, too - , and he deserves to get paid. Unlike, say, Anderson whose stats remained largely the same throughout his tenure and whose RFA offer from another team we did not match, Derrick is exactly the type of player you pay to keep.

ALSO, P.S. Landry Fields scouted Derrick and we drafted him in part because of it. Fields had a cup of coffee as Austin Spurs GM and bounced to be the assistant GM of the Hawks after we gave him the foot in the executive door and nurtured his growth. So I find it not the least bit coincidental that this proposed deal made it to print. Fields knows what we have in the better-overall-player-in-spades in Derrick. Fields and the Hawks (solely to the extent of his involvement) can suck it.

[Phreak50]

God no to that trade.

I honestly wouldn't trade White for Trae Young.

[imagump1313]

God no to that trade.

I was kinda with you!

I honestly wouldn't trade White for Trae Young.

Until you said this!

[Phreak50]

God no to that trade.

I was kinda with you!

I honestly wouldn't trade White for Trae Young.

Until you said this!

He is just over 6 foot, a 30 something % three point shooter who literally chucks them and pads stats on a terrible team.

He will be forgotten in a year or two.