Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Nobody seems willing to start the season thread, so fuck it. I'll gladly change the title if somebody comes up with something a bit more snappy, but I'm starting to get pretty excited for this team.

There are many reasons for optimism:

  • Wemby is going to be a monster. Look how much stronger he's gotten. Two years ago he was letting guys half his size barely lean on him and push him out to the three point line. Now he's straight up bullying dudes. Very much looking forward to Dillon Brooks trying to check him this year.

90551db9cc594f149ba43909c21e7a8a.gif

765b75af6e204980bc4bb962850ed1c7.gif

This is some Giannis shit, but at 7'5" with logo range and almost never misses from the free throw line. Plus he's added a ton to his bag in the post and he's always had great touch. He's still going to turn it over too much and have some awkward moments, but his shot selection looks better, granted in a very small sample size. He doesn't seem to be settling as much. Just a slight uptick in efficiency from him will make a huge difference. Add in that he's got a ton more talent around him to take some pressure off and barring injury, I will be stunned if he isn't one of the three best players in the world by the all star break. What are you supposed to do with this guy at either end of the court?

  • I don't think people realize how lucky the Spurs got in lotterying into Dylan Harper. Forget for just a minute how smooth he is shifting gears getting to the rim and finishing.... his decision making out of the pick and roll has been exceptional. He had 8 assists last night in 22 minutes. He looks like he's running pick and roll simulations through a computer. And he efforts like a mother on defense. He's not going to take long to acclimate to the league at all. No disrespect to Cooper Flagg who I think is going to be great, but it wouldn't be a total surprise to me if Harper turns out to be better than him.

a55fb50957d74dc6a0184361591634b1.gif

bab89996d629427aa712effbd457a1b5.gif

  • We haven't seen enough of Castle to know if he's improved his shot, but he's a difference maker even without being a perimeter threat. Any improvement in his shooting puts him into a different category. It would be stunning and disappointing if he didn't take at least some significant step forward in year 2.
  • At this point, Fox almost seems like an afterthought and he's one of the top 20-ish players in the league.
  • The bench is so, so much deeper and bigger and experienced. Kornet was a fantastic add and Olynyk is very solid. Barnes is another outstanding veteran presence even though he's mostly washed. He's still going to have his moments.
  • I'm excited about Carter Bryant long term. I don't know that he's going to get much run this season but he's going to compete whenever he gets a chance. Great motor to go along with his athleticism. His shot mechanics are pure even if the results haven't been great so far. On paper, he's a perfect fit.

The questions:

  • Is Mitch Johnson an even average NBA coach? I like that he shook it up and brought in his own staff and they all seem like great hires on paper, but I have zero expectations of him -- good or bad. I can't judge anything off of what he did last season given the circumstances. But that dude must pinch himself every day for the situation he inherited.
  • I'm not as concerned about how Fox, Harper and Castle mesh as others seem to be, but Fox has been playing a certain way for a long time and he's going to have to adapt a bit.
  • I have fairly low expectations for Vassell, Keldon and Sochan... the pecking order has changed and these guys will need to learn how to fit in, but all three of their lives should be easier playing off of the rest of the team instead of having to initiate their own game. This is a pretty big year for all of them as it relates to their long term fit, so they better figure it the fuck out. 
  • Can anybody knock down an open three?
  • Will this team put in the effort to play championship level defense every night? Wemby covers up for a lot of sins but will the rest of the guys pick it up a notch?
  • How will the league take the length?

Over/under for wins is 43.5 - 44.5. I'm bullish on the over because I think much of the western conference is going to be in disarray. And I think Wemby is going to be that good.

GSG

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted

We haven't seen the team at full strength yet. 44 projected wins seems a bit disrespectful, but that's still like a ten win improvement over last season, and I believe would be good enough to make the play-in.

I'd like to know what you guys think about matchups, and to ask a more specific question, whose lineups do you think will give the full-strength Spurs the most problems, and why?

Posted

All good stuff. I wouldn't call Barnes washed, though. He played 82 games and put up very efficient numbers last season. 

He's definitely not boarding or playing D for 35 mins a night the way he used to but he's a very good 15 points in 20 mins off the bench guy still. 

I think the hope though is that Sochan firmly unseats him to where we don't need to play Barnes 25 mins per game again. 

Posted

All of our SA residents, how is the ballot initiative looking? I know UTSA released a poll of likely voters that isn’t supportive of Project Marvel passing the visitor tax, but how are people actually feeling? Or is this going to be a low turnout thing and Austin starts making fuck me faces to the Spurs after it fails?

Posted
2 hours ago, Kermit said:

All of our SA residents, how is the ballot initiative looking? I know UTSA released a poll of likely voters that isn’t supportive of Project Marvel passing the visitor tax, but how are people actually feeling? Or is this going to be a low turnout thing and Austin starts making fuck me faces to the Spurs after it fails?

Full disclosure-I am strongly in support of Props A and B. I live north of downtown and work on the South Side and see a lot of posters around these areas in support of voting yes. The Spurs have dedicated around $2 million to promoting A&B which might explain the number of signs. Judge Sakai and the UTSA president have come out in support. I am not sure if Henry Cisneros and Ron Nirenberg have officially but they are clearly in favor. Manu and Sean Elliott have been vocal advocates.
 

I hope the Spurs and supporters have a good get out the vote strategy. My guess is that Prop A (Frost Bank Center renovations, Rodeo) passes pretty handily while Prop B (Spurs arena) also gets through much more closely. Just my thoughts. The circles I am in are very supportive but I welcome anyone else’s takes.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
6 hours ago, Kermit said:

Or is this going to be a low turnout thing and Austin starts making fuck me faces to the Spurs after it fails?

Órale Austin Spurs. I've wanted to be the Coyote since I was 9. This is my chance.

  • Haha 1
Posted
15 hours ago, The Dark Knight said:

Full disclosure-I am strongly in support of Props A and B. I live north of downtown and work on the South Side and see a lot of posters around these areas in support of voting yes. The Spurs have dedicated around $2 million to promoting A&B which might explain the number of signs. Judge Sakai and the UTSA president have come out in support. I am not sure if Henry Cisneros and Ron Nirenberg have officially but they are clearly in favor. Manu and Sean Elliott have been vocal advocates.
 

I hope the Spurs and supporters have a good get out the vote strategy. My guess is that Prop A (Frost Bank Center renovations, Rodeo) passes pretty handily while Prop B (Spurs arena) also gets through much more closely. Just my thoughts. The circles I am in are very supportive but I welcome anyone else’s takes.

I want the deal to happen, but I can't deny that some of the questions being asked by those opposed to Project Marvel are fair questions to ask. Questions to which the answers have been either unclear, evasive, or somewhat concerning. For example, some of the figures being cited are based on non-binding terms, which can be flimsy.

 

Posted
On 10/16/2025 at 7:57 AM, chainsaw said:

I want the deal to happen, but I can't deny that some of the questions being asked by those opposed to Project Marvel are fair questions to ask. Questions to which the answers have been either unclear, evasive, or somewhat concerning. For example, some of the figures being cited are based on non-binding terms, which can be flimsy.

 

Seriously, what questions haven't been answered? Details on the non-binding terms you mentioned?  It just seems like a no-brainier to me, and that opposition is really misinformed, and/or naturally oppositional to anything new. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
16 hours ago, Chico_SA said:

Seriously, what questions haven't been answered? Details on the non-binding terms you mentioned?  It just seems like a no-brainier to me, and that opposition is really misinformed, and/or naturally oppositional to anything new. 

If the Hemisfair TIRZ is expanded, you're looking at the potential for a forever loophole for private developers to spend $1.4 billion on projects virtually anywhere in central SA, without any mechanism of accountability. Nobody to blame if the promise of revitalization goes unfulfilled. The argument is that the private developers were going to spend this $1b, regardless, and should not be given a tax break that was intended to incentivize deals that otherwise wouldn't have been made. Those projects need to be taxed.

https://www.sacurrent.com/news/cityscrapes/cityscrapes-project-marvels-open-ended-term-sheet-will-cost-every-san-antonio-property-taxpayer/

Here are some more concrete problems:

  • The only specific development commitment outline in the document calls for “a boutique hotel meeting the NBA’s requirements for visiting teams.”
  • The $500 million doesn’t have to come just from the Spurs. It can also come from unspecified “private developers.”
  • Same thing with the balance of $900 million. Not necessarily from the Spurs, just from “private developers.” 
    • They could be any developer building in the area defined by the term sheet. And that area doesn’t have to be in the immediate vicinity of the new arena, convention center and the Alamodome — defined as the “sports and entertainment district.”
    • The Hemisfair TIRZ goes from Commerce Street to the north to Lavaca Street beyond César E. Chávez Blvd. to the south, from I-37 on the east all the way to Navarro Street on the west.
      • and its boundaries could change in the future (and City Council has a history of changing them since the TIRZ was first conceived in 1999)
  • The term sheet also doesn’t define when the period for the new development starts.
    • Would it include
      • the longstanding but unrealized plan for converting the former CPS Energy headquarters on Navarro to a hotel?
      • the estimated $750M for the city’s plan for a new convention center hotel on the site of the SAWS chilled water plant between Commerce and Market Streets?
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Thanks. I will definitely dive into that and try to learn more.  

Of the concerns you mentioned, are any of those implying an impact on joe taxpayer? I'm not seeing that, and my issue is that opposition is doing all they can to allow them to think they are footing the bill, or that "we can be using this money for something else", which is furthest from the truth.  

Posted
32 minutes ago, Chico_SA said:

are any of those implying an impact on joe taxpayer? I

The impact is that, if we're being bullshitted (because the guarantees in the term sheet aren't actually targeted at the immediate geographic vicinity of the proposed arena) then a bunch of wealthy people will get to make a lot of money without paying their fair share of taxes. It's the same problem with UT announcing a scholarship fund for poor kids, but the fine print of the scholarship fund has a bunch of loopholes that allow rich kids to qualify. Everyone supports scholarships for poor kids! Nobody should be against that! The problem is whether what we're being sold is different from what the actual deal is.

To bring this back to your question, the city would unnecessarily lose out on substantial sources of tax revenue for decades, so the only way to balance the budget would be to cut spending (much easier said than done in the age of police and firefighters unions) or to raise taxes on everyone else.

The term sheet I want to see should have firm financial commitments instead of "trust me bro, we promise to build all this stuff" and it should include binding geographic, time, and use restrictions on what construction activities qualify and what activities don't qualify, as well as key performance indicators of this project so that the people who stand to gain from this share in the risk and are held accountable if the promise of revitalization isn't kept.

Right now, it feels very Simpsons Monorail Episode and is more or less holding hostage the community's love of the Spurs with the implied threat of moving the team somewhere else. It's a fucked up thing for the ownership group to do, and it's a fucked up thing for Gina Ortiz-Jones to risk having done to the city. In the end, I don't think the owners would leave the city without trying to put a better offer on the table. If a better offer is made, then in hindsight Gina will have been smart to call their bluff and save the taxpayers millions if not billions over the years.

Posted
On 10/15/2025 at 1:37 PM, Kermit said:

All of our SA residents, how is the ballot initiative looking? I know UTSA released a poll of likely voters that isn’t supportive of Project Marvel passing the visitor tax, but how are people actually feeling? Or is this going to be a low turnout thing and Austin starts making fuck me faces to the Spurs after it fails?

I’m an SA resident and will be voting no on both propositions after doing my research, and have encouraged others in my circle to do the same. As chainsaw mentioned, the whole funding strategy for the spurs has been “trust us, we’ll pay for it”. Not exactly inspiring a lot of confidence. It sounds like the arena itself might be funded by the hotel tax but local taxpayers wil be on the hook for road improvements, utility work, and other building construction in the district. It’s just pretty clearly not going to provide the value back to the taxpayers that is promised. If they want to leave they can leave.

  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...