How Come Buford and Gregg Popovich Get a Pass for Blowing the Kawhi Leonard Trade?

[G R E Y]

It's DD's vet presence - sorely needed, DD's scoring - also needed, DD'c cap space coming up - as we have planned, plus Jakob who fits a C need and D need, and Keldon Johnson - also a need. So in your list of everyone got what they wanted, you ignore us to take a shot when we would rather what we have than what LAL offered - BI at now max taking up cap space without adding meaningful win margins, Ball and Hart - no need for them, and Deng's contract - self-expanatory. We are far better off with the deal we made.

This is the biggest example of rose-colored glasses I've ever seen. You're intentionally bringing up fit to diminish the value of BI and Ball as assets. If the rest of the league operated this way, they would consistently get worse talent in the draft because they'd be assessing fit into their lame teams instead of trying to garner value and figure out fit later. The deal was reasonable at the time, but I think it's frankly ridiculous to think it was undeniably the right move in hindsight. I'm not entirely sure you couldn't convince yourself of anything the Spurs do as being the right move, given enough time and creativity.

The biggest? On this board?!

Ball is not just about fit, it's about who we already have at PG - Dejounte and Derrick. Whether or not you think they're not better is immaterial to the fact that Ball isn't good enough to have enticed the Spurs to trade for him.

As to fit, I should have clarified that I meant it's also about culture.

Simply put:

Picture Pop. Ok?

Now picture Lavar Ball.

NOT. A. FIT.

It's immaterial if people think this is irrelevant. I want to put this kindly, but there was NO WAY that PATFO was interested in Ball. In fact, they were decidedly against him being in the deal.

Why should we have taken Ball and Hart when we got Jakob and Keldon? Jakob is a very important D anchor for us, Keldon we're very high on - again, let's keep watching his progression - and we didn't have to worry about flipping players we didn't need. You only acquire players in same positions if they're BPA, and sorry but Hart and Ball are not, and Ingram and his now max contract isn't worth taking on all the extras we don't need in redundant players and bloated mistakes of contracts. It's basically saying - why didn't you give us the best player for players and contracts you have to worry about flipping and a young guy who doesn't move the needle but will command a max salary. Wow.

It's fine if you think I wear homer glasses and think the Spurs make no bad deals. But in saying that, I go as much as I can by what has been reported, and by broader contexts that are more often than not presented like they are here ie/ BI is so great OMG! how could they have passed on him?! Because LAL didn't offer what Spurs sought. That's the bottom line you and some other LAL fans keep ignoring. The simple fact of All Star, prospect, pick. Didn't meet that standard, didn't get the player.

[Leslie Forman]

You are probably some 20 year old kid that has no memory of when the Spurs were getting bashed during the late 90's and early '00s.

LOL yeah, guy who's been posting here for about two days, you got me. I signed up here when I was five years old.

Some people just love feeling like they're persecuted, I guess. It's not healthy for you, you're not Michael Jordan.

[G R E Y]

Gotta better chance of being a top 5 player than what the spurs got. Guy had a great season for a 22 year old.

And led NOP to a worse record than what the Spurs ended up with. Yikes.

Sure. Good observation if we ignore context like teammates health , young team vs old team and coaching.

Them 2 more games the spurs won than the pelicans really means a lot.

And yet when the Spurs were beset with two seasons of over and just under 200 games lost due to player injuries it was 'oh they're done'. I agree context matters, but posters in this thread keep ignoring them. Did BI make a huge impact in LAL while there? I honestly don't know. But he seems to have taken a jump, good for him, it's just he's not the player we chose to go forward with. And it's not out of spite, but where and who we want to go forward with.

And going forward we have a young team, a better balanced team, and higher floor and higher ceiling team with tons of cap space in 2021. We're good.

[levon]

It's DD's vet presence - sorely needed, DD's scoring - also needed, DD'c cap space coming up - as we have planned, plus Jakob who fits a C need and D need, and Keldon Johnson - also a need. So in your list of everyone got what they wanted, you ignore us to take a shot when we would rather what we have than what LAL offered - BI at now max taking up cap space without adding meaningful win margins, Ball and Hart - no need for them, and Deng's contract - self-expanatory. We are far better off with the deal we made.

This is the biggest example of rose-colored glasses I've ever seen. You're intentionally bringing up fit to diminish the value of BI and Ball as assets. If the rest of the league operated this way, they would consistently get worse talent in the draft because they'd be assessing fit into their lame teams instead of trying to garner value and figure out fit later. The deal was reasonable at the time, but I think it's frankly ridiculous to think it was undeniably the right move in hindsight. I'm not entirely sure you couldn't convince yourself of anything the Spurs do as being the right move, given enough time and creativity.

The biggest? On this board?!

Ball is not just about fit, it's about who we already have at PG - Dejounte and Derrick. Whether or not you think they're not better is immaterial to the fact that Ball isn't good enough to have enticed the Spurs to trade for him.

As to fit, I should have clarified that I meant culture.

Simply put:

Picture Pop. Ok?

Now picture Lavar Ball.

NOT. A. FIT.

It's immaterial if people think this is irrelevant. I want to put this kindly, but there was NO WAY that PATFO was interested in Ball. In fact, they were decidedly against him being in the deal.

Why should we have taken Ball and Hart when we got Jakob and Keldon? Jakob is a very important D anchor for us, Keldon we're very high on - again, let's keep watching his progression - and we didn't have to worry about flipping players we didn't need. You only acquire players in same positions if they're BPA, and sorry but Hart and Ball are not, and Ingram and his now max contract isn't worth taking on all the extras we don't need in redundant players and bloated mistakes of contracts. It's basically saying - why didn't you give us the best player for players and contracts you have to worry about flipping and a young guy who doesn't move the needle but will command a max salary. Wow.

It's fine if you think I wear homer glasses and think the Spurs make no bad deals. But in saying that, I go as much as I can by what has been reported, and by broader contexts that are more often than not presented like they are here ie/ BI is so great OMG! how could they have passed on him?! Because LAL didn't offer what Spurs sought. That's the bottom line you and some other LAL fans keep ignoring. The simple fact of All Star, prospect, pick. Didn't meet that standard, didn't get the player.

Yes, and I'm positing that what the Spurs were looking for was the wrong thing to be looking for, and the results speak for themselves. I fully believe they net the same arbitrary, underwhelming results with another offer while also having more long-term potential. What I'm saying isn't radical. It's the position Zach Lowe took in the article I linked.

You're arguing with the premise that what the Spurs were looking for, which includes fit with unproven middling assets and role players, is absolutely the correct thing to do. If you and I both accepted that premise, we wouldn't differ in our opinions. But the exercise here is to evaluate whether that was the right criteria. Otherwise, what is there left to discuss if the Spurs are infallible and always globally optimal?

[DoctorX]

You are probably some 20 year old kid that has no memory of when the Spurs were getting bashed during the late 90's and early '00s.

LOL yeah, guy who's been posting here for about two days, you got me. I signed up here when I was five years old.

Some people just love feeling like they're persecuted, I guess. It's not healthy for you, you're not Michael Jordan.

Oh wow you have been on here for 14 years. You deserve a medal. Do you get a realgm plaque or trophy for having a 14 year membership? I'am from NC and live in NC whose to say that I'm not Michael Jordan.

[G R E Y]

This is the biggest example of rose-colored glasses I've ever seen. You're intentionally bringing up fit to diminish the value of BI and Ball as assets. If the rest of the league operated this way, they would consistently get worse talent in the draft because they'd be assessing fit into their lame teams instead of trying to garner value and figure out fit later. The deal was reasonable at the time, but I think it's frankly ridiculous to think it was undeniably the right move in hindsight. I'm not entirely sure you couldn't convince yourself of anything the Spurs do as being the right move, given enough time and creativity.

The biggest? On this board?!

Ball is not just about fit, it's about who we already have at PG - Dejounte and Derrick. Whether or not you think they're not better is immaterial to the fact that Ball isn't good enough to have enticed the Spurs to trade for him.

As to fit, I should have clarified that I meant culture.

Simply put:

Picture Pop. Ok?

Now picture Lavar Ball.

NOT. A. FIT.

It's immaterial if people think this is irrelevant. I want to put this kindly, but there was NO WAY that PATFO was interested in Ball. In fact, they were decidedly against him being in the deal.

Why should we have taken Ball and Hart when we got Jakob and Keldon? Jakob is a very important D anchor for us, Keldon we're very high on - again, let's keep watching his progression - and we didn't have to worry about flipping players we didn't need. You only acquire players in same positions if they're BPA, and sorry but Hart and Ball are not, and Ingram and his now max contract isn't worth taking on all the extras we don't need in redundant players and bloated mistakes of contracts. It's basically saying - why didn't you give us the best player for players and contracts you have to worry about flipping and a young guy who doesn't move the needle but will command a max salary. Wow.

It's fine if you think I wear homer glasses and think the Spurs make no bad deals. But in saying that, I go as much as I can by what has been reported, and by broader contexts that are more often than not presented like they are here ie/ BI is so great OMG! how could they have passed on him?! Because LAL didn't offer what Spurs sought. That's the bottom line you and some other LAL fans keep ignoring. The simple fact of All Star, prospect, pick. Didn't meet that standard, didn't get the player.

Yes, and I'm positing that what the Spurs were looking for was the wrong thing to be looking for, and the results speak for themselves. I fully believe they net the same arbitrary, underwhelming results with another offer while also having more long-term potential. What I'm saying isn't radical. It's the position Zach Lowe took in the article I linked.

You're arguing with the premise that what the Spurs were looking for, which includes fit with unproven middling assets and role players, is absolutely the correct thing to do. If you and I both accepted that premise, we wouldn't differ in our opinions. But the exercise here is to evaluate whether that was the right criteria. Otherwise, what is there left to discuss if the Spurs are infallible and always globally optimal?

That's not what I said at all. I will try to be more clear: Spurs sought All Star, prospect, pick. That part is clear and documented. Neither LA team met that full requirement. TO did, so they got #2.

Even if you think BI is so far better than DD, his impact, his contract for his impact and the rest of the package coming along with him simply were not better than the package coming with DD. You think Ball and Hart are better prospects. I think Jakob and Keldon are. There we disagree. Fine.

It's not about infallibility of the Spurs, it's about presenting coherent and substantiated positions for an argument. My point about fit (team needs and culture) was that because neither Ball nor Hart were so great as to displace the guards were are developing, we didn't see the need to trade for them. Not for BI and Deng and those two players.

I'm happy to revisit the conversation to discuss long-term potential realized. The results speaking for themselves are at a particular point in time that progresses, and given the metrics of our young guys' progression, I'm banking on them and us going forward.

[levon]

https://www.axios.com/nbas-best-25-under-25-aad288c8-1784-459c-b931-893dd2ca5b62.html
I'll post this one but there are numerous others that corroborate this.

25th: Lonzo Ball
9th: Brandon Ingram, ranked over guys like Jaylen Brown, JJJ, De'Aaron Fox, Devin Booker, etc.

You know who's unlisted here? Keldon Johnson. Lonnie Walker. Dejounte Murray.

The longer the Spurs fall in love with their own guys, the better off I am as a Lakers fan, so by all means, stay the course. There was a time when I thought Jordan Clarkson, Julius Randle, and Larry Nance Jr were the next big things too.

Something tells me if I start another thread like this in 2 years evaluating the Spurs transition, I'm going to be hit with the same defensive company lines, so I'll steer clear next time.

[DoctorX]

https://www.axios.com/nbas-best-25-under-25-aad288c8-1784-459c-b931-893dd2ca5b62.html
I'll post this one but there are numerous others that corroborate this.

25th: Lonzo Ball
9th: Brandon Ingram, ranked over guys like Jaylen Brown, JJJ, De'Aaron Fox, Devin Booker, etc.

You know who's unlisted here? Keldon Johnson. Lonnie Walker. Dejounte Murray.

The longer the Spurs fall in love with their own guys, the better off I am as a Lakers fan, so by all means, stay the course. There was a time when I thought Jordan Clarkson, Julius Randle, and Larry Nance Jr were the next big things too.

Something tells me if I start another thread like this in 2 years evaluating the Spurs transition, I'm going to be hit with the same defensive company lines, so I'll steer clear next time.

Yes Lonzo is such an amazing talent the Spurs missed out on considering Dejoune/White already put up similar numbers to Ball. Of course your going to be better off being a Laker fan considering you guys are great at stealing talent. If Keldon,Lonnie ever become star players i'm sure you guys will be trying to steal them in a few years later with another **** offer?

Spur fans are realistic about their young core. I don't think any of us are expecting that we could trade White-Keldon-Walker for a player like Giannis. That's something only the Lakers could pull off. Historically they are great at one sided trades.

[levon]

https://www.axios.com/nbas-best-25-under-25-aad288c8-1784-459c-b931-893dd2ca5b62.html
I'll post this one but there are numerous others that corroborate this.

25th: Lonzo Ball
9th: Brandon Ingram, ranked over guys like Jaylen Brown, JJJ, De'Aaron Fox, Devin Booker, etc.

You know who's unlisted here? Keldon Johnson. Lonnie Walker. Dejounte Murray.

The longer the Spurs fall in love with their own guys, the better off I am as a Lakers fan, so by all means, stay the course. There was a time when I thought Jordan Clarkson, Julius Randle, and Larry Nance Jr were the next big things too.

Something tells me if I start another thread like this in 2 years evaluating the Spurs transition, I'm going to be hit with the same defensive company lines, so I'll steer clear next time.

Yes Lonzo is such an amazing talent the Spurs missed out on considering Dejoune/White already put up similar numbers to Ball. Of course your going to better off being a Laker fan considering you guys are great at stealing talent. If Keldon,Lonnie ever become star players i'm sure you guys will be trying to steal them in a few years later with another **** offer?

Spur fans are realistic about their young core. I don't think any of us are expecting that we could trade White-Keldon-Walker for a player like Giannis. That's something only the Lakers could pull off. Historically they are great at one sided trades.

I like Murray, but you could have had both Murray and Ball and traded one or the other, or neither. Murray didn't even play in 18-19 because of his injury, so it's not like you had some logjam.

What I posted speaks to Ingram and Ball's value around the league, which in turn would be value to the Spurs, either on the court or through transactions. Why are you approaching this so emotionally?

So stars tank their value to come to LA and tank their value to leave SA? That means we have to deny the fact that this wasn't the best deal in hindsight? This is why I accused you of being intentional about this. You clearly understand what I'm saying, yet you're content taunting the Lakers fanbase or something, as if that's interesting or contributes anything. I think that means you don't have a sound argument here.

[DoctorX]

https://www.axios.com/nbas-best-25-under-25-aad288c8-1784-459c-b931-893dd2ca5b62.html
I'll post this one but there are numerous others that corroborate this.

25th: Lonzo Ball
9th: Brandon Ingram, ranked over guys like Jaylen Brown, JJJ, De'Aaron Fox, Devin Booker, etc.

You know who's unlisted here? Keldon Johnson. Lonnie Walker. Dejounte Murray.

The longer the Spurs fall in love with their own guys, the better off I am as a Lakers fan, so by all means, stay the course. There was a time when I thought Jordan Clarkson, Julius Randle, and Larry Nance Jr were the next big things too.

Something tells me if I start another thread like this in 2 years evaluating the Spurs transition, I'm going to be hit with the same defensive company lines, so I'll steer clear next time.

Yes Lonzo is such an amazing talent the Spurs missed out on considering Dejoune/White already put up similar numbers to Ball. Of course your going to better off being a Laker fan considering you guys are great at stealing talent. If Keldon,Lonnie ever become star players i'm sure you guys will be trying to steal them in a few years later with another **** offer?

Spur fans are realistic about their young core. I don't think any of us are expecting that we could trade White-Keldon-Walker for a player like Giannis. That's something only the Lakers could pull off. Historically they are great at one sided trades.

I like Murray, but you could have had both Murray and Ball and traded one or the other, or neither. Murray didn't even play in 18-19 because of his injury, so it's not like you had some logjam.

What I posted speaks to Ingram and Ball's value around the league, which in turn would be value to the Spurs, either on the court or through transactions. Why are you approaching this so emotionally?

So stars tank their value to come to LA and tank their value to leave SA? That means we have to deny the fact that this wasn't the best deal in hindsight? This is why I accused you of being intentional about this. You clearly understand what I'm saying, yet you're content taunting the Lakers fanbase or something, as if that's interesting or contributes anything. I think that means you don't have a sound argument here.

No one foresaw Murray tearing his ACL. He tore his ACL after the trade happened. Prior to tearing his ACL he was a great prospect. Even after the ACL tear his production is about the same as Lonzo's. I don't see how Lonzo is a hot prospect around the league.

You are calling me emotional which is ironic because you have made subtle snarky put downs of the Spurs which shows to me you are emotional.

The Lakers deal was a **** deal. We are just never going to agree and I will leave it at that.

[levon]

Yes Lonzo is such an amazing talent the Spurs missed out on considering Dejoune/White already put up similar numbers to Ball. Of course your going to better off being a Laker fan considering you guys are great at stealing talent. If Keldon,Lonnie ever become star players i'm sure you guys will be trying to steal them in a few years later with another **** offer?

Spur fans are realistic about their young core. I don't think any of us are expecting that we could trade White-Keldon-Walker for a player like Giannis. That's something only the Lakers could pull off. Historically they are great at one sided trades.

I like Murray, but you could have had both Murray and Ball and traded one or the other, or neither. Murray didn't even play in 18-19 because of his injury, so it's not like you had some logjam.

What I posted speaks to Ingram and Ball's value around the league, which in turn would be value to the Spurs, either on the court or through transactions. Why are you approaching this so emotionally?

So stars tank their value to come to LA and tank their value to leave SA? That means we have to deny the fact that this wasn't the best deal in hindsight? This is why I accused you of being intentional about this. You clearly understand what I'm saying, yet you're content taunting the Lakers fanbase or something, as if that's interesting or contributes anything. I think that means you don't have a sound argument here.

No one foresaw Murray tearing his ACL. He tore his ACL after the trade happened. Prior to tearing his ACL he was a great prospect. Even after the ACL tear his production is about the same as Lonzo's. I don't see how Lonzo is a hot prospect around the league.

You are calling me emotional which is ironic because you have made subtle snarky put downs of the Spurs which shows to me you are emotional.

The Lakers deal was a **** deal. We are just never going to agree and I will leave it at that.

You're going against all conventional wisdom to **** on players purely based on the fact that they're Lakers, and you're comforted by the fact that the guy you got back is going to walk and your other prospect has the same production as Lonzo. You're also consistently ragging on Lakers fans aimlessly, while ignoring the fact that Pop has had a history of trying to stop Lakers moves around the league, so it's not like the heat Pop gets from the fanbase is unwarranted, irrespective of this one deal.

[theonlyclutch]

The funny thing is that SAS traded both Kawhi + Green (a decent player himself), both of which were on expiring contracts that season, for DD who had two extra years on his terrible contract.

They made it easier for TOR to compete AND potentially retool while not getting any of their more valuable young assets (Delon/OG/Siakam/FVV).

I don't know if it reflects more badly on SAS that they thought this was the best offer they can get, or the rest of the league in not being able to beat out such a mediocre offer.

[G R E Y]

https://www.axios.com/nbas-best-25-under-25-aad288c8-1784-459c-b931-893dd2ca5b62.html
I'll post this one but there are numerous others that corroborate this.

25th: Lonzo Ball
9th: Brandon Ingram, ranked over guys like Jaylen Brown, JJJ, De'Aaron Fox, Devin Booker, etc.

You know who's unlisted here? Keldon Johnson. Lonnie Walker. Dejounte Murray.

The longer the Spurs fall in love with their own guys, the better off I am as a Lakers fan, so by all means, stay the course. There was a time when I thought Jordan Clarkson, Julius Randle, and Larry Nance Jr were the next big things too.

Something tells me if I start another thread like this in 2 years evaluating the Spurs transition, I'm going to be hit with the same defensive company lines, so I'll steer clear next time.

This is just... a list. No explanations for the choices which is strange. Why would these be a given? But let's say the list is fine.

Context matters.

DJ just finished his FIRST season as a starter after missing all of last season with an injury.

Lonnie just finished his FIRST season with the Spurs after also missing all of last season with an injury.

Keldon just finished his FIRST season with the Spurs since he's a rookie and spent most of the season developing in Austin.

It's fine if you equate LAL young guys - none of which are on the team anymore - to ours, but with respect, our development is known to be better. While Keldon and Derrick have made the biggest and most noticeable improvements (and the numbers show it), DJ and Lonnie have as well.

The other context is that this article was written pre-bubble: would either BI or Ball be ranked above Brown, Booker, Mitchell, Bam, Zinger, and MPJ after what they showed in the bubble? So already they've slipped. I can't speak to BI, but I know that Ball had an abysmal bubble; all three of our aforementioned prospects fared better. Too small a sample size? Ok. Let's see how everyone's development progresses and which players will have more meaningful impacts on their respective teams.

[G R E Y]

The funny thing is that SAS traded both Kawhi + Green (a decent player himself), both of which were on expiring contracts that season, for DD who had two extra years on his terrible contract.

They made it easier for TOR to compete AND potentially retool while not getting any of their more valuable young assets (Delon/OG/Siakam/FVV).

I don't know if it reflects more badly on SAS that they thought this was the best offer they can get, or the rest of the league in not being able to beat out such a mediocre offer.

Fun fact: Rudy Gay had a better season for us that DG did in TO. But as to the contracts, what did TO do with all that space coming off their books? And what you're missing about DD's contract is that it's coming off our books just when we need it to so that we will have the second highest cap space in 2021.

Take Delon and FVV off that valuable asset list as we had no need for either. As to the other two, it's about negotiating a deal that both sides agree to. It's like Spurs forgot to ask or they somehow had negotiating leverage. As it stands, Jakob is a very valuable defensive C for us and we needed it, now re-signed on a very team-friendly three-year contract.

You can't say mediocre without providing what the other options on the table were and what the Spurs sought. Lazy analysis.

[Baski]

This is hilarious. Lakers fans are so concerned for the Spurs well being that they feel the need to tell them that they made a mistake by not taking their castaways.

Just wow. At this point if Ingram doesn't turn into a Paul George level player at least, a lot of the posts in this thread will look ridiculous. They already do but wow.

"You should've taken our garbage instead of the Raptors' slightly more garbage garbage"

[chitownsalesmen]

This is hilarious. Lakers fans are so concerned for the Spurs well being that they feel the need to tell them that they made a mistake by not taking their castaways.

Just wow. At this point if Ingram doesn't turn into a Paul George level player at least, a lot of the posts in this thread will look ridiculous. They already do but wow.

"You should've taken our garbage instead of the Raptors' slightly more garbage garbage"

'

Uh little less then a year later the Lakers turned "there garbage" into Anthony Davis who was also an expiring. Look I get it you want to defend your team but that Lakers package was not total trash and Ingram alone would be better going forward then anything the Spurs currently have and your still eating another year of Derozans contract two years later, now if your argument is well at that time Ingram hadn't proven what he has now in N.O. ok but in hindsight its still a terrible deal.

From day 1 I felt that Toronto giving up a pick to get an expiring for Derozan was a good enough deal, the fact that the expiring player was Kawhi Leonard was almost highway robbery. Raptors went all in and pulled off the miracle run in 2019 you can't take that away from them, and even if that had never happened and they end up losing to Philly, them clearing Derozan from the books is still a better situation then what SAS finds themselves in right now.I don't know what other offers the Spurs had, but whether you look at from how it looks today in late 2020 or based on what we knew in 2018, it was still a raw deal for SAS and their is a valid point to this thread.

[LakersSoul]

This thread still going strong? 11 pages of torture for SAS team.

SAS went for a short sighted move just to spite Kawhi and the Lakers. Lakers ended up with LeBron and AD instead of Kawhi. Kawhi could have bolted and left the Lakers in a dangerous spot. Toronto got their ring and should have worked some kind of a S&T but whatever. SA got their vet star over a boatload of assets/tradable assets. I think that about sums it up.

Can we let it go now?

[G R E Y]

This thread still going strong? 11 pages of torture puzzled glee for SAS team.

SAS went for a short sighted present and future in mind move just to spite Kawhi and the Lakers to do what is best for the Spurs but if it happens to cause LAL fans consternation all the better. Lakers ended up with LeBron and AD instead of Kawhi. Kawhi could have bolted and left the Lakers in a dangerous spot. Toronto got their ring and should have worked some kind of a S&T but whatever. SA got their vet star over a boatload of assets/tradable assets. I think that about sums it up.

Can we let it go now?

Some adjustments for a side-by-side perspective in the post above.

This is like telling a guy you're just not that into him and seeing him in the rear view mirror running after you waving frantically with signs insisting you are you really are!

What's sad is looking at the state of LAL prior to LBJ joining the team and somehow believing it was about anything but LBJ joining the team. LBJ rejoined the Cavs and got them to send the top pick and Bennet and a first round pick for Kevin Love; LBJ goes to LAL and the team tries to get #2 with the 'Godfather offer' that was so Godfathery that it had to be sweetened with a couple of Fredos to get AD. For both Spurs and NOP, there was no question of where the players were going - AD even got fined for it and his dad made sure Cs wouldn't bother trading for him. So to say that any LAL package was some great coup return - see OKC for that because of leverage - is deeply disingenuous knowing that the players in question worked to affect their trade value in singling out a destination.

Neither NOP nor the Cavs were able to get better. We kept winning in two seasons that had around 200 games lost to player injuries, and now that we missed the POs once in 22 years but have a solid crop of young players with vets coming off the books, it's somehow viewed as 'short sighted' because it missed swiping at #2 and LAL, both of whom went on to win. As if the team already in TO and LBJ already in LAL had nothing to do with it.

A boatload of assets? Do you mean the ones that haven't impacted winning, the ones that NOP added a starting-quality PG in the draft to, the ones LAL doesn't develop, the ones we didn't want because we preferred -- another package that is better? Like it would make sense if NOP had really good seasons, or had LAL offered what Spurs asked, but in reality neither of these happened.

Tradeable assets? Like Deng's contract still on LAL's books or Ball and Hart who we didn't need so then we'd have been saddled with making extra moves rather than simply developing the guys we got instead?

Some LAL fans' insistence here that Spurs are somehow worse off without their assets even as our situation has been laid out over and over is a peculiar perspective rooted in disbelief at the rejection. No thank you. We're not interested. Have to make sure the doors are locked in case they come banging on the windows at a red light screaming about their totally awesome package from going on three years ago. So weird, man.

[MINDKCUF]

the spurs had no leverage in this trade. kawhi was hurt and refused to play and had 1 yr left on contract.
he was an injured rental w/ no emotion and everyone knew it.
kawhi tryied to cry his way to l.a. and i love the spurs sent him to toronto. as far from l.a. as possible.'
it was a statement from a class organization to not fall to the demands of the players in contract. ....if only other organizations had that much self respect.

also derozan is allstar who has been good w/ spurs. last year he average 22/5/5 on 53%fg. 53% for a guard is great.
plus a 1st rd pick and there starting/backup center poeltl has some game.

kawhi is def a better player than derozan but look at career lines-
derozan- 19/4/3
kawhi-18/6/2
guarantee is much closer than anyone would believe.

of course stats dont always equal wins and kawhi got them 2 finals mvps and dpoy's that derozan will never have.

i will never forget kawhi refusing to hold the o'brien trophy after they won because he just wanted to leave toronto even if he was champ. he couldnt even fake it

[Spanish_Laker]

The Spurs will regret this for the next 10 years.