So which one are we trading?

[koriwhat]

PJ Washington can't be traded before the end of the season because of the extension he signed.

Before thinking at what Spurs should do, we must first know what they have and how players are fitting together. Right now, with Fox out, we still don't know.

I would love PJ on this team and have wanted to snag him for the past 2 seasons.

 

[flox]

Castle is still on his rookie deal so if you were to trade him away, you won't get a player of similar abilities in terms of salary match, unless you trade with a team way under the cap, or find a young player also on a rookie/bargain deal who happens to play the 3/4. I can't find a team like that so he would either be packged with a high dollar value deal (say, Vassell) or for high potential picks.

Not sure exactly what type of actual help we are desperately looking for, given it's 4 games into the season, but to give away a player like Castle because of a potential logjam that has yet to happen is just odd logic. Him currently being in the wrong role doesn't mean that we have a logjam, I see it more as the coaching staff forcing him to grow in a role that he is not good at yet, as a training exercise, how that would end up I don't know, but a team can never have too many ball handlers. To give him away now would be like how the Cavs got rid of Kevin Johnson because they have Mark Price, or how the Mavs didn't resign Nash because they wanted the ball in Dirk's hands more.

Castle is a talented player who has shown nothing but a growth in the year and a bit he's been in the league, to trade him now to get help, whatever that is, is premature. Now if some guy comes and said they are trading Jokic for Castle he'd be on a the plane in 3 minutes and I will personally pack his bags, but that isn't really the question, the question is who are we trading for some actual help, which really isn't defined. Trading Castle away for some 3-D player, or some shooting PF (which I am thinking in terms of Jabari Smith Jr) is way overkill. Someone like Vassell plus a few 2nd rounders should be closer in value.

Alternatively we cannot rule out that getting rid of him could be like the 76ers selling high on MCW after his ROY campaign. Only revisionist history will know who is right.

I am in agreement that what is considered actual help is not defined.

However, the idea that he is some untouchable trade asset shouldn't even be considered on a poll of who we should trade in Feb is not good practice.

I don't think either of us know why he's currently assigned the role he's being assigned but it's clear that there are some struggles. A player of his experience and age, this can be expected. But it is something to keep an eye on and worth of considering when it comes time to trade, especially if that role becomes critical to our success.

Sure, maybe the rookie deal means is much harder to be a one to one trade, but it's not like trades are commonly one to one.

 

[brazil]

what did I confirm? He had the same DBPM as Keldon, worst on the entire team. You think that changed now because he hit a couple of 3s? He won't shoot 43% from 3 this season, nor has he ever done it before.

Barnes is a nice vet, makes the smart play and can shoot 3s. But that's about it. He's a back up PF on a title team, not a starter. He can't defend the top PFs like Aaron Gordon, Chet, AD, Randle, Zion, Markkanen, etc. etc.

You're probably the same guy who was obsessed with Trey Lyles as a starting PF when we had him.

Name one starting PF in the West that is worse than Barnes. Here I'll list them for you, just like I did when all of you were sucking off Trey fucking Lyles. I'll even add some bench players:

Aaron Gordon
Lauri Markkanen
Alperen Sengun
Chet Holmgren
Julius Randle/Naz Reid
Zion Williamson
Rui Hachimura
Draymond Green
Kawhi Leonard/John Collins
Keegan Murray
Anthony Davis/PJ Washington/Cooper Flagg
Royce O'Neal
Jaren Jackson Jr./Santi Aldama
Toumani Camara/Jerami Grant

He's not better than any of these which makes him the worst starting PF in the entire conference period.

Nobody is saying he will shoot 43% he is a 38% career which is solid, last year he was at 43% and everybody agrees he won't accomplish that again. Your point is about weakest link, Barnes is not the weakest link... Spurs we lack perimeter shooting that's quite straight forward. Sochan cannot shoot untill proven otherwise, Champ is a SF, KJ, Bryant can't shoot. If Sochan suddenly starts to hit some 3s we can discuss but right now Barnes is useful especially if Spurs get into the POs. Victor can compensate Barnes flaws on defense, nobody is capable to compensate lack of shooting especially this year where Victor wants to operate more inside... We have Dylan, Fox, Castle, KJ, Sochan who wants to attack the basket, for that you need space. You have 3 guys other than Victor who can shoot 3s above 37%: Champ, Barnes, Vassell and your point is Barnes is the weakest link

If you'd want to improve spurs right now without considering future or development you trade KJ, Sochan before Barnes.

As you said Barnes is just that a nice vet in last year of his contract spacing the floor and bringing scoring, that's exactly why he is here.

I won't enter in your Lyles delirium... I did not even remember this dude was a Spur

 

[ambchang]

Alternatively we cannot rule out that getting rid of him could be like the 76ers selling high on MCW after his ROY campaign. Only revisionist history will know who is right.

I am in agreement that what is considered actual help is not defined.

However, the idea that he is some untouchable trade asset shouldn't even be considered on a poll of who we should trade in Feb is not good practice.

I don't think either of us know why he's currently assigned the role he's being assigned but it's clear that there are some struggles. A player of his experience and age, this can be expected. But it is something to keep an eye on and worth of considering when it comes time to trade, especially if that role becomes critical to our success.

Sure, maybe the rookie deal means is much harder to be a one to one trade, but it's not like trades are commonly one to one.

Then we are talking about different things. I am talking about trading him for some real help, which to me is a 3-D player or a shooting PF who can defend, you seem to be talking about that help being a high level star.

I don't believe any single star is untouchable. If OKC offers their entire team and draft picks for Wemby, i would likely bite, even though I don't know how the cap would allow that to fit in, but again, I am talking about minor adjustments now, and of the options, Vassell, Keldon, Sochan (or a combination of each), Barnes, Bryant are all players I would trade before I would let go of Castle.

 

[RC_Drunkford]

This is… a bit disingenuous. Comparing Barnes to other team’s stars? Can you compare those team’s starting center with Wembanyama then?
Barnes should be compared to teams with a role player at PF, because not all teams are distributed with stars at the same positions. And while I’m sure you’ll find role players who are better than Barnes, it still isn’t as many as you’re describing in your post. At least then it’s an honest way of painting this picture for this point you’re making.

I'm comparing a starting PF to other starting PFs in the same conference. Not hard to understand

 

[RC_Drunkford]

Nobody is saying he will shoot 43% he is a 38% career which is solid, last year he was at 43% and everybody agrees he won't accomplish that again. Your point is about weakest link, Barnes is not the weakest link... Spurs we lack perimeter shooting that's quite straight forward. Sochan cannot shoot untill proven otherwise, Champ is a SF, KJ, Bryant can't shoot. If Sochan suddenly starts to hit some 3s we can discuss but right now Barnes is useful especially if Spurs get into the POs. Victor can compensate Barnes flaws on defense, nobody is capable to compensate lack of shooting especially this year where Victor wants to operate more inside... We have Dylan, Fox, Castle, KJ, Sochan who wants to attack the basket, for that you need space. You have 3 guys other than Victor who can shoot 3s above 37%: Champ, Barnes, Vassell and your point is Barnes is the weakest link

If you'd want to improve spurs right now without considering future or development you trade KJ, Sochan before Barnes.

As you said Barnes is just that a nice vet in last year of his contract spacing the floor and bringing scoring, that's exactly why he is here.

I won't enter in your Lyles delirium... I did not even remember this dude was a Spur

KJ is going to play SF too when everybody's healthy and is a decent enough shooter plus better rebounder and overall scorer than Barnes. I'm not talking about 3rd stringers like Carter, I'm talking about rotation players. Barnes is the weakest starting PF in the west. Between him, Olynyk and Sochan one of those 3 can be a bench PF. But unless Jeremy miraculously becomes a 3-point shooter, we need a starting 4. And even if he does, the easiest way to upgrade would still be replacing Barnes. You haven't proven anything wrong here. Barnes can shoot and is a bad defender, Jeremy can't shoot and is a good defender. You could argue Barnes is a better fit, but the only skill you are basing this off is shooting. The majority of NBA players can shoot, that's easily replaceable.

 

[Chinook]

I didn't read some of the posts in this thread, but Castle's shooting is the big swing skill here. If he shoots well enough to be a positive in spacing, Sochan makes a lot of sense as a starting PF. If he can't, then the team is going to have a "hole" at PF because they'll want a good three/good D player there, and those aren't easy to come by. They don't need a guy like John Collins now that they have Kornet and Olynyk. They'd ideally want a 3-5 defender, and I don't love PJ as that guy either. Harper seems like the best option for the bench at the moment, but if he is a good shooter, then playing Fox/Harper/Vassell/Sochan/Wembanyama is an option. Or if not Sochan, then starting Kornet before staggering his and Victor's minutes might be an option if the perimeter guys could be trusted to hit their shots.

A lot of folks want the Spurs to trade for a star PF. I think that would be a bad idea. Durant would have made sense, but that's because he's a transcendent talent. Outside of him, they really aren't hurting for star power and just need guys who can be valuable pieces to a contender. If they can identify the next Aaron Gordon, that could work. Is Obi Toppin an option? He might just be another body. Or he might be someone well on his way to being a valuable rotation player on the best teams.

 

[spurraider21]

I didn't read some of the posts in this thread, but Castle's shooting is the big swing skill here. If he shoots well enough to be a positive in spacing, Sochan makes a lot of sense as a starting PF. If he can't, then the team is going to have a "hole" at PF because they'll want a good three/good D player there, and those aren't easy to come by. They don't need a guy like John Collins now that they have Kornet and Olynyk. They'd ideally want a 3-5 defender, and I don't love PJ as that guy either. Harper seems like the best option for the bench at the moment, but if he is a good shooter, then playing Fox/Harper/Vassell/Sochan/Wembanyama is an option. Or if not Sochan, then starting Kornet before staggering his and Victor's minutes might be an option if the perimeter guys could be trusted to hit their shots.

A lot of folks want the Spurs to trade for a star PF. I think that would be a bad idea. Durant would have made sense, but that's because he's a transcendent talent. Outside of him, they really aren't hurting for star power and just need guys who can be valuable pieces to a contender. If they can identify the next Aaron Gordon, that could work. Is Obi Toppin an option? He might just be another body. Or he might be someone well on his way to being a valuable rotation player on the best teams.

I just wonder if we are talking about starting Sochan for the sake of starting/justifying him or because he is actually bringing something we need. In this scenario, we'd take the lineup we've been seeing, and subtracting Barnes and Champagnie with Sochan and Fox. that's a big dip in shooting. and aside from the shooting, Barnes still from time to time can put the ball on the floor, lower his shoulder a little, and get thise 10-12 foot jumpers off with reasonable reliability. neither is particularly adept at drawing fouls, but HB is at least a better FT shooter.

i think in this snapshot of time, thie point is somewhat moot anyway. castle's been shooting at his usual 29% 3pt number we're all used to, and its not like his FT shooting is giving us much room for optimism surrounding his shooting in general.

 

[Chinook]

I just wonder if we are talking about starting Sochan for the sake of starting/justifying him or because he is actually bringing something we need. In this scenario, we'd take the lineup we've been seeing, and subtracting Barnes and Champagnie with Sochan and Fox. that's a big dip in shooting. and aside from the shooting, Barnes still from time to time can put the ball on the floor, lower his shoulder a little, and get thise 10-12 foot jumpers off with reasonable reliability. neither is particularly adept at drawing fouls, but HB is at least a better FT shooter.

i think in this snapshot of time, thie point is somewhat moot anyway. castle's been shooting at his usual 29% 3pt number we're all used to, and its not like his FT shooting is giving us much room for optimism surrounding his shooting in general.

I don't think PF is a major issue on the team. Some other posters are more worried about that than I am. I just think the Spurs are getting locked out of options because most of their perimeter players are at best streaky-average shooters. The best version of this rotation might have Sochan, Wemby and Kornet as the primary front-court rotation, but it probably won't have that AND Fox, Castle and Harper as the main guards. A lot of Wemby's otherworldly spacing is being taken up by the perimeter players who shouldn't need it, and that means the front-court player who'd normally get to benefit from it have to instead space for the guards. That affects Sochan obviously, but it also affects the viability of the Wemby/Kornet duo against good teams.

I fully believe the team having three downhill PGs is going to help them dominate in points-in-the-paint rankings in a way they haven't since Tony's prime. They aren't wasting Victor's gravity at all. But their lack of off-ball versatility means there will be drawbacks that most teams don't have to deal with when it comes to their front court.

 

[spurraider21]

I fully believe the team having three downhill PGs is going to help them dominate in points-in-the-paint rankings in a way they haven't since Tony's prime. They aren't wasting Victor's gravity at all. But their lack of off-ball versatility means there will be drawbacks that most teams don't have to deal with when it comes to their front court.

i agree with this

id rather cater to any of the 3 guards than to sochan. if he's incompatible with them, he's the most dispensable, simple as that.

it will be very interesting to see how Harper's shooting compares with Castle when they both get off-ball opportunities alongside Fox

 

[Chinook]

i agree with this

id rather cater to any of the 3 guards than to sochan. if he's incompatible with them, he's the most dispensable, simple as that.

it will be very interesting to see how Harper's shooting compares with Castle when they both get off-ball opportunities alongside Fox

To me, it's not really about feeling bad about Sochan, though I do think he has a steeper hill to climb than he theoretically should. It's more than whoever replaces him is going to have to hit a sweet spot, and that spot would be much easier to hit if the guards could shoot. It's easier to find rugged defensive forwards for whom shooting is still a work in progress than to get contending-level three-and-D forwards. The Spurs might have to end up parting with a decent draft pick, or two if they're serious. If shooting were less of a concern, they might be able to snag a bad shooter for cheap or even let Bryant struggle through his shooting woes to learn on the job. There may not even be a theoretical PF that can truly make up for the lack of shooting.