LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons...

Moderators: Andre Roberstan, HartfordWhalers, BullyKing, Texas Chuck, MoneyTalks41890, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger, Trader_Joe, loserX

lelelazza8
Junior
Posts: 287
And1: 15
Joined: Jun 30, 2009

LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons... 

Post#1 » by lelelazza8 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 2:22 pm

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...
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 66,590
And1: 50,209
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons... 

Post#2 » by bondom34 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 2:27 pm

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
jbk1234
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 53,554
And1: 32,144
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
 

Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons... 

Post#3 » by jbk1234 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 2:33 pm

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.
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 66,590
And1: 50,209
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons... 

Post#4 » by bondom34 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 2:40 pm

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
jbk1234
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 53,554
And1: 32,144
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
 

Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons... 

Post#5 » by jbk1234 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 2:46 pm

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.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 85,804
And1: 88,818
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons... 

Post#6 » by Texas Chuck » Mon Jun 29, 2015 2:47 pm

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.
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 66,590
And1: 50,209
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons... 

Post#7 » by bondom34 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 2:49 pm

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
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,269
And1: 5,446
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: LAL/SAC/PHO with reasons... 

Post#8 » by KF10 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 5:40 pm

Another bad Boogie Trade number 46708..

Return to Trades and Transactions