A comprehensive evaluation of the Spurs’ offseason
The Spurs still have to make some small moves to complete their roster, but the big additions have been made. The PtR staff offer their thoughts on San Antonio’s offseason.
How well do you think the Spurs did on draft night, getting Stephon Castle, Juan Nuñez, Harrison Ingram and a first and a swap from the Timberwolves?
Marilyn Dubinski: I definitely saw the Castle pick coming and have been happy with what we’ve seen of him in SL so far, so no complaints there. I wasn’t as annoyed about them trading the 8th pick as some were just because the Spurs already have 5 players on rookie contracts (including Castle) with anywhere from 2 to 4 first picks in next year’s much deeper draft. Nunez was a smart pick if only because he’s stash-able and his passing game is intriguing (although I didn’t understand the purpose of trading down one spot to get him), and Ingram is a good late get who will probably end up on a two-way contract.
Mark Barrington: I am simply an unfrozen caveman basketball writer, and I was a little concerned about trading the eighth pick. I realize the long-term benefits, but complicated schemes like a pick swap seven years in the future scare me, and I do not understand them. I’m really happy with the Castle pick, and I think Ingram is an interesting second-round project. I’ll believe that Nunez is not a draft and stash on the day he shows up in training camp. Overall, the short term was good, but what’s happening in 2030 and 2031 is beyond my power to comprehend.
Jesus Gomez: I loved the draft the Spurs had. Zaccharie Risacher and Reed Sheppard would have been more seamless fits but Castle was someone I liked throughout the pre-draft process because of his defense and offensive potential. Is he going to be a full-time point guard in the future? Who knows, but he will help no matter his position. Trading the pick made a lot of sense for a team with so many young guys getting ready to bring in some veterans. The future first and the swap give San Antonio trade assets or a valuable way to get cheap high-tier talent in the middle of Victor Wembanyama’s prime if the Timberwolves struggle. Nuñez was a good stash option, since a good Barcelona team wanted him, and Ingram is a viable 3-and-D prospect, so there’s not much to complain about.
J.R. Wilco: The biggest gripe I’ve heard about draft night is the trading of the eighth pick, so that’s where I’ll camp out because I was initially disappointed — it felt like punting. Here’s what I found to be a satisfying logical progression. In a draft like this year’s where there are so many unknowns, what’s normally a fraught situation practically triples in degree of difficulty. We know there are going to be stars that come out of this draft because there are every year. And when you have a ton of guys on the board, but your evaluation metrics aren’t favoring any of them, then it’s impossible to identify which ones will be the guy that armchair GM’s get to point to years later while saying, “Look who they picked when this guy was still on the board.” So, recognizing that Wright and the Spurs brain trust didn’t have anyone they absolutely had to take, the alternative to trading the pick is taking a player whose chances they weren’t sold on. Since another Luka Samanic situation would be both heartbreaking and roster-constraining (with all the future picks the club has) I came to terms with it.
How well do you think the Spurs did in free agency by using their cap space to add Chris Paul and Harrison Barnes?
Dubinski: That’s certainly more than I thought they would do. We talked about the need for veterans, but part of me wouldn’t have been surprised if the Spurs mostly ran it back. My initial thought on Paul was that I respect him as a player but always hated his on-court attitude, but with time I’ve grown to respect the signing more, both as a means of acceptance and knowing that he will bring plenty of positives. He and Barnes will bring quality leadership while filling in some gaping holes on the roster (playmaking and shooting), all while the Spurs avoided mortgaging their future, so in the end it has been a better offseason than I thought it would be.
Barrington: The ultimate goal is to build a contender for the NBA title. Neither of these guys would be part of a contending San Antonio team because of the timeline, but I think they do advance the team toward that goal by providing leadership and mentoring as it transitions from shambolic tank wreckage to competitive roster. The team will be better this season, but the most important thing is that the young guys will learn the craft of winning basketball from experienced players.
Gomez: The Spurs have made it clear they are not skipping steps in the rebuild, but after last season it became evident that they needed a competent playmaker and a shooter who could also defend to have a roster that made sense. Running it back was unacceptable and impractical, since Wemby would have made it hard to tank. Even someone who has sports-hated Chris Paul with a burning passion for over a decade, like myself, has to accept that adding him on such a good contract is a good move. Barnes was one of the stopgap big forwards I thought the Spurs should keep an eye on this offseason, along with Tobias Harris and Bojan Bogdanovic, so I think the fit is right. And getting that swap is just the cherry on top.
Wilco: Love the pickups. Love their fit. Love their knowledge of the game and mentor aptitude. Really love the shortness of their contracts and their tradability. But most of all, I love the fact that for the first time in ages, the team has a starting five (Paul, Vassell, Sochan, Barnes, Wemby) that looks like a legit starting five for a real live NBA team without having to squint hard or try to slap lipstick on a pig. And all the above love hasn’t encompassed Paul’s status as the lobbiest of point guards since he entered the league, which means that imagining him running PnRs with Wemby is my new favorite summer pastime.
The Spurs still have the room exception. Who would you like them to use it on?
Dubinski: Sandro Mamukelashvili. He has earned the chance in what few opportunities he has been given, and he showed amazing chemistry with Wemby at the end of the season. I wouldn’t argue with a bench rotation of Tre Jones, Stephon Castle, Keldon Johnson, Mamu and Zach Collins. That would be a tough second unit and much more reliable than last year’s bench.
Barrington: I think it’s mostly going to be used to bring back players they had to renounce in order to sign Barnes and Paul. So welcome back Mamu. Maybe Barlow and Bassey. The Spurs might end up picking up a few waived players from other teams, but I would think re-signing players who already know the system would have priority.
Gomez: The Spurs need a third center, but there aren’t any worth the room exception available. My first pick would have been Paul Reed but the Pistons claimed him off waivers before he hit the market. The others out there that could be useful, like Omer Yurtseven and Bismack Biyombo are minimum contract players. So I can see the front office not using it fully and taking advantage of the rule change that allows exceptions to be used to acquire players via trades to get someone they want or absorb some salary for a draft pick during the season.
Wilco: It’s gotta be Mamu, right?
