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

[Exstatic]

Again, I dont think 2 legit firsts (if thats what you want to call it as the CHI could have easily conveyed this year etc..) + paying Fox 55M a year average is “cheap” but doesnt really matter. It was a fair deal overall and I like that the Spurs made the deal even at that cost and I said so at the time. I also said it was not “cheap” at the time, but it was fair.

Im talking acquisition costs, as is everyone else here when we’re referring to getting him cheap, ‘getting’ being the operative verb. His contract is not cheap, but its market level.

 

[DPGSpurs]

But then we'd be wasting the entirety of Wemby's rookie deal on developing young guards that might not ever get on Fox's level.
If we wanted to trade Fox away, it would be a shitshow since he did everything to get here and he'd surely do the same thing he did to Sacramento and we'd end up with Wiggins and Fontecchio or some shit.


It's not cheap, but when you see that Desmond Bane cost 4 firsts and a swap...

Spurs would still have plenty of assets to get someone instead of Fox IMO - you’d have Harper + Castle + stuff from Fox deal to re-route those assets to someone else.

But Im fine with Fox and actually like him a lot (despite worries about contract).

 

[DPGSpurs]

Im talking acquisition costs, as is everyone else here when we’re referring to getting him cheap, ‘getting’ being the operative verb. His contract is not cheap, but its market level.

They are intertwined to me. His extension is very much part of the acquisition cost since you had to agree to that in order to acquire him.

 

[LeBowen]

Spurs would still have plenty of assets to get someone instead of Fox IMO - you’d have Harper + Castle + stuff from Fox deal to re-route those assets to someone else.

But Im fine with Fox and actually like him a lot (despite worries about contract).

I'm sure we tried to get Markkanen who would've obviously been a better fit, but Ainge asked for like 5 picks and one of Castle/Harper.
Then we go back to my point of all the variables that need to allign.

No point in dwelling on the past.
Fox is here and is delivering so far.
We need to get Wemby back and see how they play after like 20 games together in the starting lineup because what we've been doing so far isn't optimal.

 

[scott]

I'm sure we tried to get Markkanen who would've obviously been a better fit, but Ainge asked for like 5 picks and one of Castle/Harper.
Then we go back to my point of all the variables that need to allign.

No point in dwelling on the past.
Fox is here and is delivering so far.
We need to get Wemby back and see how they play after like 20 games together in the starting lineup because what we've been doing so far isn't optimal.

If we'd have got Markkanen, everyone would be complaining about his contract as well (they already do, and he's not even on our team).

Unless a player is a clear cut Top 10-15 guy, fans are going to complain about their contracts. But the reality in the league is that top 50-60 guys (other than those on rookie deals) all are on max-level contracts. That's just what a Top 50 player costs.

I think part of it for a lot of fans (not particularly anyone here, but just in general) is that they see Player X who is a Top 40 guy making close to what the Top 3-5 guys in the league make and since the Top 40 guy isn't close to being a Top 3-5 guy, they see it as an overpay. But in reality, those Top 3-5 guys are actually just really underpaid because the CBA limits how much they could make. Teams would give up 50%+ of the cap for a Jokic or Wemby if they were allowed to.

 

[dn0774]

I know people refer to Tre Jones and Zach Collins and 2nd rounders as filler, but it should be acknowledged that Zach Collins was not filler and actually had negative value in that trade given his contract size.

Spurs '27 1st is likely in the 20s but there is potential value in case it became a lost season somehow. The Wolves '31 would've been a nice chip to keep in case Ant Edwards ever hit the trade market (sounds unlikely, but so was Luka) but that being the only significant asset to give up for Fox (and unload an unplayable for us Zollins) is a big win overall.

Having Fox as our 2nd guy while Castle and Harper discover what they are (and aren't) has been such a luxury. Young guards need some runway to figure things out (assuming they do) and that usually results in extremely inconsistent and inefficient play (sounds familiar). With Fox, we get to play competitive basketball with a proper floor general now while still having so much upside as a team for the future.

 

[DPGSpurs]

I'm sure we tried to get Markkanen who would've obviously been a better fit, but Ainge asked for like 5 picks and one of Castle/Harper.
Then we go back to my point of all the variables that need to allign.

No point in dwelling on the past.
Fox is here and is delivering so far.
We need to get Wemby back and see how they play after like 20 games together in the starting lineup because what we've been doing so far isn't optimal.

Agree - mine was more of a “im thinking about it now” comment vs some urgent worry or anything like that

 

[DPGSpurs]

If we'd have got Markkanen, everyone would be complaining about his contract as well (they already do, and he's not even on our team).

Unless a player is a clear cut Top 10-15 guy, fans are going to complain about their contracts. But the reality in the league is that top 50-60 guys (other than those on rookie deals) all are on max-level contracts. That's just what a Top 50 player costs.

I think part of it for a lot of fans (not particularly anyone here, but just in general) is that they see Player X who is a Top 40 guy making close to what the Top 3-5 guys in the league make and since the Top 40 guy isn't close to being a Top 3-5 guy, they see it as an overpay. But in reality, those Top 3-5 guys are actually just really underpaid because the CBA limits how much they could make. Teams would give up 50%+ of the cap for a Jokic or Wemby if they were allowed to.

Maybe, but we are clearly seeing a shift in guys who are in similar tier to say Fox (Ja, Trae, etc..)and teams being very reluctant to give up picks OR pay them their maxes. Theres been a shift of sorts even if there’s plenty of examples like you said.

And even for Lauri it’s different for UTA vs SA with Fox. I would not have cared *as much* if SA was really bad and didnt have Wemby and paid Fox for example (like UTA with Lauri). It’s the entirety of the circumstance with SA/Fox that Im projecting

But it’s not an alarm and didn’t mean it to come off that way. Im good with where Spurs are obviously

 

[scott]

It’s just my opinion, but I don’t put Trae or Ja in a similar tier as Fox at all.

 

[DPGSpurs]

It’s just my opinion, but I don’t put Trae or Ja in a similar tier as Fox at all.

You may not but I think in general the league sort of did (but thats subjective).

 

[scott]

You may not but I think in general the league sort of did (but thats subjective).

Did, I think is correct… but if you look at the last batch of player rankings, there is a definite gap.

For Ja, a big part of that is availability

 

[Exstatic]

You may not but I think in general the league sort of did (but thats subjective).

I’d say not, since even Fox’s forced trade returned more to Sacto than ATL got for Trae on an open market.

 

[CGD]

You may not but I think in general the league sort of did (but thats subjective)

Like 2 years ago.

 

[DPGSpurs]

Fox not doing us any favors tonight lol

 

[Sugus]

I've seen a few comments like this and I don't get them.

Is Fox supposed to come steal the ball away from his teammate? Ignore the plays the coach is calling? Start a fight in a huddle?

Oh, I meant within the context of the team, obviously. Don't want Fox going rogue or anything. But he is so obviously lacking protagonism on offense, which is cool when the young guards are rolling, but not so good when they're having bad stretches though.

Tonight's game was (another) a good example of this. Fox obviously is capable of taking over the game as he was doing to close out the 4th...... But then inexplicably goes to park in the corner for the last possession, as Castle gets another uninspiring handling bout and we lose the game.

I don't know if Mitch is calling Fox away from the ball in those situations or if it just naturally happens, but either way, it's not good. And Castle again was Brick City tonight..... Coaching malpractice not to adjust to such a string of bad shooting games tbh.

 

[spursistan]

Fox not doing us any favors tonight lol

He's having way too many stinkers & no-shows for that contract he's on, tbh. At least Harper & Castle are 19 & 21 respectively, so that's to be expected when they go dry for long stretches,

 

[Rafa]

I don’t think it’s controversial to say Fox isn’t playing up to his contract, at least not in the sense of being consistent. I’d still want to see how he locks in in the playoffs, but this pattern of good to bad games is getting a bit old.

 

[scott]

Oh, I meant within the context of the team, obviously. Don't want Fox going rogue or anything. But he is so obviously lacking protagonism on offense, which is cool when the young guards are rolling, but not so good when they're having bad stretches though.

Tonight's game was (another) a good example of this. Fox obviously is capable of taking over the game as he was doing to close out the 4th...... But then inexplicably goes to park in the corner for the last possession, as Castle gets another uninspiring handling bout and we lose the game.

I don't know if Mitch is calling Fox away from the ball in those situations or if it just naturally happens, but either way, it's not good. And Castle again was Brick City tonight..... Coaching malpractice not to adjust to such a string of bad shooting games tbh.

But do you think Fox just decided to do that, or that was the “play” that Mitch drew up (I use quotes, because that sure wasn’t much of a play)?

I definitely would have preferred a Fox/Wemby PnR there (and I would have preferred we go for the quick basket rather than play for the last shot, in the event we missed and had to foul)… but that’s the play the coaches came up with.

If we find out that Mitch is just saying “you guys just do what you want” or Mitch let Fox draw up the play, then I’ll have a different opinion… but my guess is that Fox did exactly what he was supposed to do on that play.

 

[spursistan]

I don’t think it’s controversial to say Fox isn’t playing up to his contract, at least not in the sense of being consistent. I’d still want to see how he locks in in the playoffs, but this pattern of good to bad games is getting a bit old.

Not even Aldridge was this inconsistent when we traded for him, and he was 3 years older than Fox. Honestly, not a good sign for the remainder of that deal,

 

[Blizzardwizard]

8-53 from three (15%) since the last OKC win.

Wemby is gonna start looking at Mr. Max Contract like this if things don't change pretty soon.

 

[Quentin_Compson]

I think this stems from me wanting the FO to be absolute relentless sharks on finding every edge in all phases.

Was way more important pre Wemby when it was clear what was needed (even though many fought me on it). The Fo has been damn good and sharp for a while now so I’m very happy with them.

But I think often people take my attention to detail or looking at small margins stuff and extrapolate that as being unhappy or truly mad or something

I’m not and I assume (without me needing to explicitly spell it out all the time) people understand me at this point and know me pointing out some things like this doesn’t mean I’ve lost sight of bigger picture or don’t understand the context in which some of this stuff exists. I do - but I still believe every little detail matters: 15th roster spot, contract details, finding opportunities for trades to get assets or improve team etc all of that

But as I said, even with Fox contract concerns (which i guarantee we will revisit by 2027) I’m happy with him and team and Fo

In my opinion, the flaw in your line of thinking is that you seem to expect the Spurs' FO to basically "win" every deal/trade/transaction. But that expectation, to me, is not only unrealistic, it's also kind of unnecessary. A lot of trades and deals in the NBA work in a checks and balances kind of way. Any organisation will always have to gauge what they want to achieve with a transaction (be it a trade, drafting or handing out contracts and extensions) and balance that with opportunity costs that will arise in trying to achieve said goal. I think that the so-called winners and losers of trades, for example, are often much less clear-cut than a lot of people make them out to be.
Anyway, long story short, "winning" a deal/trade/transaction in the short term shouldn't be the ultimate goal - making your team better or putting your franchise in a position to be able to make it better down the road should be the goal.

 

[Ice009]

I think people are leaning on Fox too much for the team's struggles.

He's better than both Steph and Dylan, but the Spurs seem to be trying to get Castle and Harper reps and Fox isn't getting consistent minutes as the lead guard. If the Spurs weren't going to use him as the lead guard/playmaker, why did they trade for him and pay him all that money? I don't believe the coaching and whatever offense the team is trying to run is doing him any favours. You can't expect him to come in and save the day after Castle and Harper have fucked up all game/did next to nothing all game. He can't get into a rhythm playing like that IMO. Look at what he did as the lead guard when Victor missed those 4 weeks or so. He's already proven it/shown it in earlier games this season.

 

[Corso]

I think this stems from me wanting the FO to be absolute relentless sharks on finding every edge in all phases.

Was way more important pre Wemby when it was clear what was needed (even though many fought me on it). The Fo has been damn good and sharp for a while now so I’m very happy with them.

But I think often people take my attention to detail or looking at small margins stuff and extrapolate that as being unhappy or truly mad or something

I’m not and I assume (without me needing to explicitly spell it out all the time) people understand me at this point and know me pointing out some things like this doesn’t mean I’ve lost sight of bigger picture or don’t understand the context in which some of this stuff exists. I do - but I still believe every little detail matters: 15th roster spot, contract details, finding opportunities for trades to get assets or improve team etc all of that

But as I said, even with Fox contract concerns (which i guarantee we will revisit by 2027) I’m happy with him and team and Fo

I ain't mad at ya.

 

[WembyFan]

A Klutch GM was gonna pay a Klutch player, conflict of interest obviously but i guess that doesn't exist in the NBA.

 

[Neuromancer]

Fox has been solid overall but he is definitely not worth the contract he was given. At least he hasn't played like it yet. Really feels like we still haven't gotten a signature dominant game from him at all yet