Player The Layne Staley Depression-Laden Foxhole of De'Aaron Martez Fox

[LeBowen]

Fox's issue are stepback and off the dribble 3s.
21-68, 30.8% on stepback 3s if nba.com is to be trusted.
Left corner 25-50, 50%.
Right corner, 18-38, 47.4%.
Above the break 3s, 88-307, 28.7%.

It's one of those cases where I'd rather have him shoot pull up mid-range shots (111-228, 48.6% between 10ft and 3pt line) than chuck 3s.
Should be restricted to corner 3s and mid-range.

 

[spursistan]

Fox against Denver (4 games):

Averaged 36 MPG played: 20 pts /7.5 ast /3.5 reb on 47 TS% (39 FG% - 25% 3PT - 69 FT% )

He's been a complete dud in this match-up. Disgusting efficiency against a bottom 10 defense.

 

[scott]

Fox's issue are stepback and off the dribble 3s.
21-68, 30.8% on stepback 3s if nba.com is to be trusted.
Left corner 25-50, 50%.
Right corner, 18-38, 47.4%.
Above the break 3s, 88-307, 28.7%.

It's one of those cases where I'd rather have him shoot pull up mid-range shots (111-228, 48.6% between 10ft and 3pt line) than chuck 3s.
Should be restricted to corner 3s and mid-range.

Totally agree, but it's also one of those things where you still kind of need Fox (and Castle and Harper for that matter) to take the occasional step back or OTD 3 to keep the defense honest. When Wemby or Vassell are in the game, the provide that threat for us, but when one of them sits we do need someone to at least keep that threat alive. I just want to see a lot less of it.

 

[spursistan]

Fox against Denver (4 games):

Averaged 36 MPG played: 20 pts /7.5 ast /3.5 reb on 47 TS% (39 FG% - 25% 3PT - 69 FT% )

He's been a complete dud in this match-up. Disgusting efficiency against a bottom 10 defense.

Game 1: Vassell 's 37 won us the game
Game 2: Castle Triple double put us in a position to win
Game 3: Wemby going toe to toe with Jokic put us in position to win only for him to choke it away.
Game 4: Can't lead us past Denver 3rd stringers ending the game in an embarrassing fashion with those missed practice 3s.

 

[frenchfred]

I wouldn't do Fox for Giannis.

For whatever you think of Fox, this exact version of Fox is part of a team that won 62 games in part because he bought into being a team player. I don't think Giannis on our team (and likely playing 50 games since he seems to be breaking down) delivers a 62 win team, and I don't think it results in a harmonious team either. He'll want his touches, his points, his ISOs, etc. and that will come at the expense of someone. We already have somewhat of a struggle finding enough of the ball for our main weapons without adding one of the highest USG players in the league.

If you want to move on from Fox, I think that's a perfectly valid opinion to have... but I think the proper approach would be to turn him into multiple high level role players, not another star.

I proposed Giannis because the Bucks will try to trade him this summer most likely and we’ll have a hard to find a suitor for Fox and his max contract without attaching multiple picks and/or taking a lot of bad contracts. Giannis’ value has been going down but he only has 2 years left, which would coincide with Castle’s new contract. At that point, he takes a big paycut or you let him go.

 

[scott]

I proposed Giannis because the Bucks will try to trade him this summer most likely and we’ll have a hard to find a suitor for Fox and his max contract without attaching multiple picks and/or taking a lot of bad contracts. Giannis’ value has been going down but he only has 2 years left, which would coincide with Castle’s new contract. At that point, he takes a big paycut or you let him go.

But I'd still be making my team worse for 2 years. Sounds like a bad idea.

 

[Seventyniner]

How realistic is a 3-team trade where MIL gets Fox but the Spurs don't take back Giannis?

That's a ton of salary for the third team to match and the Spurs would have to take just about all of it back. There also likely isn't enough draft capital available to appease both the Spurs and Bucks.

 

[spurraider21]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2044147409115091217

 

[DTW]

How realistic is a 3-team trade where MIL gets Fox but the Spurs don't take back Giannis?

That's a ton of salary for the third team to match and the Spurs would have to take just about all of it back. There also likely isn't enough draft capital available to appease both the Spurs and Bucks.

Bucks: Fox . . . maximize immediate and short term help by retaining lottery pick + add prime star lead guard.
Spurs: Quickley, Dick, Bucks '31 or 32 protected (top 4?) 1st . . . get better fitting third guard, create increased role for Harper, replace portion of draft capital from Fox acquisition.
Raptors: Kuzma, Portis, Rollins, Trent Jr., Harris . . . toughest sell, but they'd save significant money long term when extending similar but significantly less expensive PG.

 

[Seventyniner]

Bucks: Fox . . . maximize immediate and short term help by retaining lottery pick + add prime star lead guard.
Spurs: Quickley, Dick, Bucks '31 or 32 protected (top 4?) 1st . . . get better fitting third guard, create increased role for Harper, replace portion of draft capital from Fox acquisition.
Raptors: Kuzma, Portis, Rollins, Trent Jr., Harris . . . toughest sell, but they'd save significant money long term when extending similar but significantly less expensive PG.

Interesting, but what I had in mind was the Bucks actually shipping out Giannis and being willing to take Fox plus only one first back (maybe two, or one and several seconds). The main source of draft capital would be the team that acquires Giannis because they would mainly only be giving up filler in terms of salaries.

If the Bucks can't convince Portland or New Orleans to let go of control of the Bucks' picks, and the Bucks decide to trade Giannis after all, the Bucks might want to start their rebuild from other than rock bottom. Fox would help that cause. A healthy Fox plus some good role players should at least be a 10 seed in the East.

It still doesn't make sense for the Spurs, a dollar is worth more than 5 or 6 quarters in a sport like basketball, but maybe if Fox sucks in the playoffs the Spurs try to nip the coming salary crunch in the bud. Just a thought exercise, I don't expect anything like this to happen.

 

[MannyIG]

I guess it should have been pretty obvious all season but Fox is just the new KJ/Devin because of his contract. There's a group of Spurs fans who think that your pay should dictate where you land on statistical production and largely ignore the context the CBA and how it dictates players league wide get paid. When Devin and KJ were the highest paid and not clearly being all stars, people bitched about them non stop. Now that they are role playes on a championship team, people don't see them that way. And its not like their salaries have changed. They're still being paid like elite role players but now people are more accepting of that becuase we're good but also because they now have Fox to complain about and direct that angst to.

So regardless of the fact that Fox is a huge contributor both in stats and also unselfish leadership to a team that won 62 games when no one expected out of them while maintaining the most immaculate vibes while developing two other primary ball handlers who threaten his very position on the team, people have made it their mind that this dude is the worst thing to come around since Keith Bogans. Its such a weird take.

If Fox sucks in the playoffs, he's deserving of criticism. But so many people have had that decided for a good 4 to 5 months at this point. Simply because dude got paid. Dude getting paid has not stopped the Spurs from making a single transaction and hasn't hurt the team in any way, but once again, that is besides the point.

 

[DTW]

Interesting, but what I had in mind was the Bucks actually shipping out Giannis and being willing to take Fox plus only one first back (maybe two, or one and several seconds). The main source of draft capital would be the team that acquires Giannis because they would mainly only be giving up filler in terms of salaries.

If the Bucks can't convince Portland or New Orleans to let go of control of the Bucks' picks, and the Bucks decide to trade Giannis after all, the Bucks might want to start their rebuild from other than rock bottom. Fox would help that cause. A healthy Fox plus some good role players should at least be a 10 seed in the East.

It still doesn't make sense for the Spurs, a dollar is worth more than 5 or 6 quarters in a sport like basketball, but maybe if Fox sucks in the playoffs the Spurs try to nip the coming salary crunch in the bud. Just a thought exercise, I don't expect anything like this to happen.

Oh. Well, I don't see why the Bucks would want Fox if it's not in a last gasp to attempt to extend Antetokounmpo scenario nor do I see the Spurs putting Fox in a situation like that.

If the Bucks prioritize veterans as opposed to picks, expect them to be younger than Fox.

Fox and Quickley are much closer in metrics than reputation and Quickley's shooting would make him a better fit here, so I'm not sure the Spurs would be worse off.

 

[wEmBoY]

Yep, he's seemingly incapable of those Donovan Mitchell-esque scoring outbursts anymore. Yes, he took a step back to accommodate Castle and Harper but i thought he could still score an efficient 28-30 points at will and when called upon. But I am not sure about that anymore. He is clearly lost half a step, having more trouble beating defenders off dribble, hence his plummeting FTR leading to more bailout step-backs and, worst of all, his 3 point shot appears to be broken.

If he can't be an adequate sidekick for Wemby at a golden prime age (28), a serious conversation need to be had about his future here in the summer.

Fox wont score 28-30ppg with wemby on the team.

 

[Ice009]

I'm feeling really good about De'Aaron Fox. He has the capability of being a clear number 2 for the Spurs in the playoffs. I've sat back over the past few days and thought about the season he's had in retrospect (helping all the young guys improve with not only advice, but also stepping aside in actual games and allowing for them to play their games and grow and shine - I felt a little let down in the regular season but that is because going into the season, I expected him to be the 1B or 2A all season. I think he may have been looking at the long game and what he did may have just made a bigger difference for the team and their chances in the playoffs - It's going to pay off in the playoffs. The young guys needed this, and I am believing it's going to really pay off).

I wasn't sure if he can just turn it on in the playoffs (even thought he's helped the young guys grow, can he turn he still turn it on for himself is the major worry/concern I've had), but I believe he will do it. He's going to need to be a big contributor for the Spurs in the playoffs and I think he knows that too. We've only got the one series to go off of, but there is no reason for me to think that he won't raise his level of play in the playoffs bigtime. They (Kings) took the Warriors to 7 and that was a year after the Warriors won it all, so it's not like he did it against some scrub team.

I think he'll go up another gear or two and is going to be electric in the playoffs. Let's go De'Aaron. The team/we need you to play great in the playoffs for the Spurs to have a chance to do something special.

 

[Exstatic]

I'm feeling really good about De'Aaron Fox. He has the capability of being a clear number 2 for the Spurs in the playoffs. I've sat back over the past few days and thought about the season he's had in retrospect (helping all the young guys improve with not only advice, but also stepping aside in actual games and allowing for them to play their games and grow and shine - I felt a little let down in the regular season but that is because going into the season, I expected him to be the 1B or 2A all season. I think he may have been looking at the long game and what he did may have just made a bigger difference for the team and their chances in the playoffs - It's going to pay off in the playoffs. The young guys needed this, and I am believing it's going to really pay off).

I wasn't sure if he can just turn it on in the playoffs (even thought he's helped the young guys grow, can he turn he still turn it on for himself is the major worry/concern I've had), but I believe he will do it. He's going to need to be a big contributor for the Spurs in the playoffs and I think he knows that too. We've only got the one series to go off of, but there is no reason for me to think that he won't raise his level of play in the playoffs bigtime. They (Kings) took the Warriors to 7 and that was a year the Warriors won it all, so it's not like he did it against some scrub team.

I think he'll go up another gear or two and is going to be electric in the playoffs. Let's go De'Aaron. The team/we need you to play great in the playoffs for the Spurs to have a chance to do something special.

He actually played well when the Beam Team lost to the eventual champs, GS.

 

[wEmBoY]

Fox made a big sacrifice. Imagine he’s still in his prime but took a backseat to let wemby and castle get their touches and be the primary and secondary options in the regular season. Although i think fox and castle are 2A-2B.

 

[Ice009]

He actually played well when the Beam Team lost to the eventual champs, GS.

Yeah, that's not what I mean, sorry, wrote it wrong. The team (GS) were still the Champs until they lost in the next round. It wasn't the same season. I missed a word to say that.

 

[scott]

I'm feeling really good about De'Aaron Fox. He has the capability of being a clear number 2 for the Spurs in the playoffs. I've sat back over the past few days and thought about the season he's had in retrospect (helping all the young guys improve with not only advice, but also stepping aside in actual games and allowing for them to play their games and grow and shine - I felt a little let down in the regular season but that is because going into the season, I expected him to be the 1B or 2A all season. I think he may have been looking at the long game and what he did may have just made a bigger difference for the team and their chances in the playoffs - It's going to pay off in the playoffs. The young guys needed this, and I am believing it's going to really pay off).

I wasn't sure if he can just turn it on in the playoffs (even thought he's helped the young guys grow, can he turn he still turn it on for himself is the major worry/concern I've had), but I believe he will do it. He's going to need to be a big contributor for the Spurs in the playoffs and I think he knows that too. We've only got the one series to go off of, but there is no reason for me to think that he won't raise his level of play in the playoffs bigtime. They (Kings) took the Warriors to 7 and that was a year after the Warriors won it all, so it's not like he did it against some scrub team.

I think he'll go up another gear or two and is going to be electric in the playoffs. Let's go De'Aaron. The team/we need you to play great in the playoffs for the Spurs to have a chance to do something special.

I'm just curious what does "turning it on" mean and why is that what we care about?

Which of these playoff outcomes would we be happier with:

A: Fox averages 18.6 pts, 6.2 ast, 3.8 reb, 1.2 stl on .578 TS% and we win the title with Castle and Harper having great post seasons
B: Fox averages 26.6 pts, 5.6 ast, 4.6 reb, 2.0 stl on .567 TS% and we lose in 7 to the Nuggets after Castle and Harper have a terrible series

Like... if scenario A happens, should we trade Fox? If B happens, now we are happy with Fox?

What are our priorities here?

 

[spurraider21]

I'm just curious what does "turning it on" mean and why is that what we care about?

Which of these playoff outcomes would we be happier with:

A: Fox averages 18.6 pts, 6.2 ast, 3.8 reb, 1.2 stl on .578 TS% and we win the title with Castle and Harper having great post seasons
B: Fox averages 26.6 pts, 5.6 ast, 4.6 reb, 2.0 stl on .567 TS% and we lose in 7 to the Nuggets after Castle and Harper have a terrible series

Like... if scenario A happens, should we trade Fox? If B happens, now we are happy with Fox?

What are our priorities here?

i think the assumption would be we have a better chance of winning if Fox does what you say in option B

its kind of a weird scenario. like what is a better wemby performance, a 40/20 game with 8 blocks while shooting 60% from the field going going 5-8 from 3 but we lose... or he goes 4-14 from the field and scores 13 points with 9 rebounds 1 block but we manage to win

 

[Ice009]

I think he's going to be more aggressive, attack more is that I am getting at. I think he'll cut down his threes and be going to the rim a lot more. People are saying that it looks like he's lost a bit of a step and can't get to the rim as easily and that might be why he's taking more threes. I don't think that is the case, but I guess we'll find out in the playoffs. I don't know what the final numbers will be, but IMO, he'll attack more. I'm not looking at it in terms of numbers. And why does it have to be a scenario such as A or B? What if the Spurs win the title with a scenario B. I don't believe he has to take a back seat and it has to be balanced across the board for the Spurs to win. It'll fall where it falls numbers wise. Maybe the numbers don't end up being quite as good even if he's more aggressive. Maybe he'll pick his spots more on when to be ultra aggressive and when not to be. I think he might have been taking it a little easier in the regular season and might put his body on the line more in the playoffs on his drives. It's going to be interesting to see how it unfolds. There's a lot at stake for both the Spurs and for Fox to play well (mostly due to the personnel the Spurs now have at the guard spots).

To answer your question. The priorities are to win so if that means lesser numbers that should be the number one goal, but like I said, that doesn't mean he has to be less aggressive and take a back seat. I, personally, don't think the Spurs can win it all if he's less aggressive and takes a back seat.

 

[scott]

i think the assumption would be we have a better chance of winning if Fox does what you say in option B

its kind of a weird scenario. like what is a better wemby performance, a 40/20 game with 8 blocks while shooting 60% from the field going going 5-8 from 3 but we lose... or he goes 4-14 from the field and scores 13 points with 9 rebounds 1 block but we manage to win

I agree that is the assumption... but that's where I think some people are making a mistake (at least, those who are making that assumption). Option A are the exact stats that won 62 games and have us even discussing the playoffs.

I think the fairest, and best, criticism of Fox is that we need more consistency out of him in the playoffs. But at no point this season have I ever felt "man, how much better would we be if Fox we're averaging an extra 5ppg" or whatever statistical norm people are hoping for (because those points would have to come from somewhere. We rated 4th in ORTG, it's not like we were 22nd and hurting for offensive production).

 

[LeBowen]

I agree that is the assumption... but that's where I think some people are making a mistake (at least, those who are making that assumption). Option A are the exact stats that won 62 games and have us even discussing the playoffs.

I think the fairest, and best, criticism of Fox is that we need more consistency out of him in the playoffs. But at no point this season have I ever felt "man, how much better would we be if Fox we're averaging an extra 5ppg" or whatever statistical norm people are hoping for (because those points would have to come from somewhere. We rated 4th in ORTG, it's not like we were 22nd and hurting for offensive production).

Well, if he was more consistent he'd average 5 more ppg.
We don't need him to be better in games he's good in, just to cut down the number of games where he disappears.

 

[scott]

I think he's going to be more aggressive, attack more is that I am getting at. I think he'll cut down his threes and be going to the rim a lot more. People are saying that it looks like he's lost a bit of a step and can't get to the rim as easily and that might be why he's taking more threes. I don't think that is the case, but I guess we'll find out in the playoffs. I don't know what the final numbers will be, but IMO, he'll attack more. I'm not looking at it in terms of numbers. And why does it have to be a scenario such as A or B? What if the Spurs win the title with a scenario B. I don't believe he has to take a back seat and it has to be balanced across the board for the Spurs to win. It'll fall where it falls numbers wise. Maybe the numbers don't end up being quite as good even if he's more aggressive. Maybe he'll pick his spots more on when to be ultra aggressive and when not to be. I think he might have been taking it a little easier in the regular season and might put his body on the line more in the playoffs on his drives. It's going to be interesting to see how it unfolds. There's a lot at stake for both the Spurs and for Fox to play well (mostly due to the personnel the Spurs now have at the guard spots).

To answer your question. The priorities are to win so if that means lesser numbers that should be the number one goal, but like I said, that doesn't mean he has to be less aggressive and take a back seat. I, personally, don't think the Spurs can win it all if he's less aggressive and takes a back seat.

If he puts in that stats of Option B and we still win the chip, obviously everyone is going to be very happy (other than the Fox haters).

I used those two specific stat lines for a reason though. Option A is his exact stat line from this season, the stat line that delivered 62 wins. The Option B stat line is his best statistical season (a season SAC didn't even make the playoffs). But Option A is the result of the Spurs playing the way they do... a way that got them 62 wins and put them in position to even be a title contender to begin with. A lot of us think we can potentially win a chip, all based on this 62-win season... so my question is... why do we suddenly want that team to be something else?

What I mostly want to see from Fox is the kind of calming, smart decision making that prevailed in the first half of the season before the ASB. Before we found our groove, there was a bit more chaos and Fox would be the one to settle things down. The team is going to need that. I don't think we need Fox trying to "do more" per se, we just need him to do what he does more consistently and without mistakes.

 

[CGD]

Fox made a big sacrifice. Imagine he’s still in his prime but took a backseat to let wemby and castle get their touches and be the primary and secondary options in the regular season. Although i think fox and castle are 2A-2B.

Hes doing fine. Still getting max money to be 2nd (but maybe 3rd) banana, while also not having the pressure of being "the guy."

 

[wEmBoY]

People needs to understand that fox isnt going to score 25-28ppg on this team as he is not the primary option. His FGA this season of 14.5 FGA is lowest since 18-19 season. Wemby has 16.9FGA this season, and it will most likely increase as wemby enters his prime. And i expect castle and harper’s touches will increase next season and beyond.