LAL
trade Randle, Russell, J.Hill and future 1st round pick...
get Cousins, Landry and Booker...
Starting Five: Cousins/Landry/Bryant/Booker/Clarkson
Why? LAL get a real C, a bad contract (but can be the starting PF if healthy) and young SG, great shooter...
SAC
trade Cousins, Landry and Stauskas...
get Bledsoe and Randle...
Starting Five: WCS/Randle/Gay/McLemore/Bledsoe
Why? Get a perfect PG for Karl offense and a dynamic PF... Save money of two bad contract...
PHX
trade Bladsoe and Booker...
get Russell, Stauskas, J.Hill and LAL 1st round pick...
Starting Five:Hill/Morris/Morris/Russell/Knight
Why? Russell can be an all star (better than Bledsoe) and create an incredible duo with Knight... Stauskas can became in a player like JJ Redick if find the right team... and PHX can be this team... get a future 1st round pick...
LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
Moderators: Andre Roberstan, HartfordWhalers, BullyKing, Texas Chuck, MoneyTalks41890, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger, Trader_Joe, loserX
LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
-
- Junior
- Posts: 287
- And1: 15
- Joined: Jun 30, 2009
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,590
- And1: 50,209
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
This is still really bad for SAC and PHX. The Kings aren't getting out of 2 contracts, just one, and giving up by far the best player. I like Bledsoe's fit there, but basically all the value they get is from the Suns. PHX gives up the second best player and a lotto pick for Russel and a future first plus taking on Hill. Just way to good for LA.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 53,554
- And1: 32,144
- Joined: Dec 22, 2010
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
bondom34 wrote:This is still really bad for SAC and PHX. The Kings aren't getting out of 2 contracts, just one, and giving up by far the best player. I like Bledsoe's fit there, but basically all the value they get is from the Suns. PHX gives up the second best player and a lotto pick for Russel and a future first plus taking on Hill. Just way to good for LA.
Maybe the OP has been edited but it looks like PHX is here just to steal value to me. They get Russell and future first for Bledsoe which seems like an overpay. Hill is a TO if I'm not mistaken so if no one wants him on that contract he can just be waived.
Clarkson won't be the difference between the Lakers getting Cousins or not get Cousins. He'll be included if push comes to shove and the Lakers can get back Collison. The difference will be future first round picks. I think the Lakers are done trading them away and assuming the picks won't be any good because they're the Lakers.
cbosh4mvp wrote:
Jarret Allen isn’t winning you anything. Garland won’t show up in the playoffs. Mobley is a glorified dunk man. Mitchell has some experience but is a liability on defense. To me, the Cavs are a treadmill team.
Jarret Allen isn’t winning you anything. Garland won’t show up in the playoffs. Mobley is a glorified dunk man. Mitchell has some experience but is a liability on defense. To me, the Cavs are a treadmill team.
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,590
- And1: 50,209
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
jbk1234 wrote:bondom34 wrote:This is still really bad for SAC and PHX. The Kings aren't getting out of 2 contracts, just one, and giving up by far the best player. I like Bledsoe's fit there, but basically all the value they get is from the Suns. PHX gives up the second best player and a lotto pick for Russel and a future first plus taking on Hill. Just way to good for LA.
Maybe the OP has been edited but it looks like PHX is here just to steal value to me. They get Russell and future first for Bledsoe which seems like an overpay. Hill is a TO if I'm not mistaken so if no one wants him on that contract he can just be waived.
Clarkson won't be the difference between the Lakers getting Cousins or not get Cousins. He'll be included if push comes to shove and the Lakers can get back Collison. The difference will be future first round picks. I think the Lakers are done trading them away and assuming the picks won't be any good because they're the Lakers.
I think I just value Bledsoe more than most, I think he's a top 10ish PG who's still pretty young and locked up long term. I like Russell as a prospect but he hasn't played a game yet, and if LA is getting this package that will likely be a late first.
Also, just checked but looks like LA wasn't planning on picking up Hill's option so kinda DOA there anyway.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 53,554
- And1: 32,144
- Joined: Dec 22, 2010
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
bondom34 wrote:jbk1234 wrote:bondom34 wrote:This is still really bad for SAC and PHX. The Kings aren't getting out of 2 contracts, just one, and giving up by far the best player. I like Bledsoe's fit there, but basically all the value they get is from the Suns. PHX gives up the second best player and a lotto pick for Russel and a future first plus taking on Hill. Just way to good for LA.
Maybe the OP has been edited but it looks like PHX is here just to steal value to me. They get Russell and future first for Bledsoe which seems like an overpay. Hill is a TO if I'm not mistaken so if no one wants him on that contract he can just be waived.
Clarkson won't be the difference between the Lakers getting Cousins or not get Cousins. He'll be included if push comes to shove and the Lakers can get back Collison. The difference will be future first round picks. I think the Lakers are done trading them away and assuming the picks won't be any good because they're the Lakers.
I think I just value Bledsoe more than most, I think he's a top 10ish PG who's still pretty young and locked up long term. I like Russell as a prospect but he hasn't played a game yet, and if LA is getting this package that will likely be a late first.
Also, just checked but looks like LA wasn't planning on picking up Hill's option so kinda DOA there anyway.
I still see Russell as Russell or Okafor. Because if Phoenix calls up Hinkie and asks about a trade, there is little doubt in my mind that Hinkie pulls the trigger. I get that Russell hasn't played yet but he was a top three pick and they're getting a future pick. There aren't many players who can pull a top three pick before they've had an opportunity to disappoint.
cbosh4mvp wrote:
Jarret Allen isn’t winning you anything. Garland won’t show up in the playoffs. Mobley is a glorified dunk man. Mitchell has some experience but is a liability on defense. To me, the Cavs are a treadmill team.
Jarret Allen isn’t winning you anything. Garland won’t show up in the playoffs. Mobley is a glorified dunk man. Mitchell has some experience but is a liability on defense. To me, the Cavs are a treadmill team.
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
- Texas Chuck
- Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
- Posts: 85,804
- And1: 88,818
- Joined: May 19, 2012
- Location: Purgatory
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
Why is Phoenix getting more value than Sacramento? Doesn't make any sense at all. I wouldn't have bothered re-posting this if I'm honest. Boogie for Bledsoe and Randle is terrible value for the Kings.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,590
- And1: 50,209
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
jbk1234 wrote:bondom34 wrote:jbk1234 wrote:
Maybe the OP has been edited but it looks like PHX is here just to steal value to me. They get Russell and future first for Bledsoe which seems like an overpay. Hill is a TO if I'm not mistaken so if no one wants him on that contract he can just be waived.
Clarkson won't be the difference between the Lakers getting Cousins or not get Cousins. He'll be included if push comes to shove and the Lakers can get back Collison. The difference will be future first round picks. I think the Lakers are done trading them away and assuming the picks won't be any good because they're the Lakers.
I think I just value Bledsoe more than most, I think he's a top 10ish PG who's still pretty young and locked up long term. I like Russell as a prospect but he hasn't played a game yet, and if LA is getting this package that will likely be a late first.
Also, just checked but looks like LA wasn't planning on picking up Hill's option so kinda DOA there anyway.
I still see Russell as Russell or Okafor. Because if Phoenix calls up Hinkie and asks about a trade, there is little doubt in my mind that Hinkie pulls the trigger. I get that Russell hasn't played yet but he was a top three pick and they're getting a future pick. There aren't many players who can pull a top three pick before they've had an opportunity to disappoint.
True, but they're giving up the guy they just picked too.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
-
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 25,269
- And1: 5,446
- Joined: Jul 28, 2006
Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...
Another bad Boogie Trade number 46708..
Return to Trades and Transactions