LMA to PHX for Bledsoe/Bender

getrichordie · Post #1 » by **getrichordie** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 2:33 am

PHX gets: Lamarcus Aldridge - Lamarcus Aldridge because they need a PF who really can start now

SAS gets: Eric Bledsoe, Dragan Bender - SA can add a Parker replacement and get Bender to learn from Pau. Tony takes a backseat to Bledsoe because he's humble and Pop will tell him so.

Who says no?

Alternative:

PHX gets LMA + filler + pick (?)
SAS gets Knight + Bender + Ulis

jredsaz · Post #2 » by **jredsaz** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 2:37 am

Suns do. I don't think they give up Bledsoe if they are acquiring Aldridge.

Sent from my SM-N920V using RealGM mobile app

NashtyNas · Post #3 » by **NashtyNas** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 2:37 am

I see something along the lines of Favors/Exum appealing more to both SA and Utah than this appeals to Phoenix.
If we want to trade for a star, it's to pair them WITH Bledsoe and Booker in the backcourt - not at the cost of one or the other.
Literally everyone else would be on the table, but those 2 guys can't be outgoing if you have an All-Star coming in - it just doesn't make sense directionally.

Fo-Real · Post #4 » by **Fo-Real** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 2:48 am

I think what makes LMA to phoenix tough is the thought of we tried to sign you to add to what we have, without weakening the team, now he would need us to give up important pieces to revisit what we were trying so desperately to do. HELL NAW MAN! C-MON MAN!!!

Post #5 » by **bwgood77** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 2:59 am

getrichordie wrote:PHX gets: Lamarcus Aldridge

SAS gets: Eric Bledsoe, Dragan Bender

Who says no?

Both. Makes sense for neither.

Post #6 » by **bwgood77** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 3:02 am

I_Socrates wrote:I see something along the lines of Favors/Exum appealing more to both SA and Utah than this appeals to Phoenix.
If we want to trade for a star, it's to pair them WITH Bledsoe and Booker in the backcourt - not at the cost of one or the other.
Literally everyone else would be on the table, but those 2 guys can't be outgoing if you have an All-Star coming in - it just doesn't make sense directionally.

Now THAT is one that makes sense. Favors is a very nice replacement. As much as Pop likes Hill though he might prefer him considering they want to win now and they just drafted Dejounte Murray.

If Aldridge is really concerned because he wants to be the face of the franchise, one that competes, that might be his best bet, though I don't know that he'd really be as much of a fan favorite as Hayward or Gobert.

MemitoQ303 · Post #7 » by **MemitoQ303** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 3:06 am

I can see LMA to Utah. Makes sense. TBH I also see The Sixers, Celtics, and Nuggets going after him, maybe even throwing the Bucks in there.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Chinook · Post #8 » by **Chinook** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:24 am

I can't imagine the Spurs trading LMA for a PG without having Parker go out. If they're going to go young, they have to do it all the way.

NashtyNas · Post #9 » by **NashtyNas** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:07 am

Chinook wrote:I can't imagine the Spurs trading LMA for a PG without having Parker go out. If they're going to go young, they have to do it all the way.

What if it's a move more like I mentioned where they are certainly going younger, but could continue to compete now as well?

I mean replacing Duncan and LMA from last year with Favors and Gasol is actually an overall upgrade on the court in my opinion, plus they get a quality young prospect to replace Parker in the future in Exum. Get to let Parker & Manu retire as Spurs then move on with a young core of Leonard/Favors/Exum.

Parker/Mills
Green/Exum
Leonard/Ginobili
Favors/Lee
Gasol/Dedmon

On the other hand, Utah gets an immediate upgrade in the front court and adds some much needed go-to scoring at the cost of a prospect that may take another 2 years to be productive. Go all-in on trying to make the playoffs now and make some noise.

Hill/Mack
Burks/Hood
Hayward/Johnson
LMA/Lyles
Gobert/Diaw

Utah can also do some more roster swapping to get a good 3&D Wing + a distributing PG to start ahead of Hill... maybe something like Burks + Lyles for Rubio + Shabazz? Sorry I'm sidetracking this really badly.

patman52 · Post #10 » by **patman52** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:38 am

Why does Utah trade a 25 YO favors making 12 mill for a 31 YO Aldridge making 25 with his trade Kicker. Both are under contract for two years. Gobert and Hayward are going to make 25 each next year. And Johnson and Burks make another 20. Hill will be 16-20 more that is a lot of cap money.

getrichordie · Post #11 » by **getrichordie** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:18 am

patman52 wrote:Why does Utah trade a 25 YO favors making 12 mill for a 31 YO Aldridge making 25 with his trade Kicker. Both are under contract for two years. Gobert and Hayward are going to make 25 each next year. And Johnson and Burks make another 20. Hill will be 16-20 more that is a lot of cap money.

It would be a win now move. That's why.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

getrichordie · Post #12 » by **getrichordie** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:24 am

Updated post.

I've got an alternative trade to PHX:

Knight, Ulis, Bender for LMA + filler (Murray (?))

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

hcsilla · Post #13 » by **hcsilla** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:38 am

getrichordie wrote:I've got an alternative trade to PHX:

Knight, Ulis, Bender for LMA + filler (Murray (?))

LMA is a good player but his age doesn't fit at all to Suns' core's and I hope that the Suns did learn their lesson after doing anti-rebuilding moves like LAL pick for Knight and getting no benefit.

I would offer Knight and Len for LMA and wouldn't look back after the Spurs saying no.

DanishLakerFan · Post #14 » by **DanishLakerFan** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:59 am

getrichordie wrote:PHX gets: Lamarcus Aldridge - Lamarcus Aldridge because they need a PF who really can start now

SAS gets: Eric Bledsoe, Dragan Bender - SA can add a Parker replacement and get Bender to learn from Pau. Tony takes a backseat to Bledsoe because he's humble and Pop will tell him so.

Who says no?

Alternative:

PHX gets LMA + filler + pick (?)
SAS gets Knight + Bender + Ulis

I thnk Phx says no. Wouldn't trade Bender for LMA, much less Bender AND Bledsoe.

stitches · Post #15 » by **stitches** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:15 am

getrichordie wrote:
patman52 wrote:Why does Utah trade a 25 YO favors making 12 mill for a 31 YO Aldridge making 25 with his trade Kicker. Both are under contract for two years. Gobert and Hayward are going to make 25 each next year. And Johnson and Burks make another 20. Hill will be 16-20 more that is a lot of cap money.

It would be a win now move. That's why.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

And what do we win? Second place? Are you sure Aldridge is more win now than Favors + Exum?

This trade makes no sense for the Jazz timeline-wise. The very reason Spurs want to do that trade is the same the Jazz don't want to - Aldridge doesn't fit the timeline of the rest of the roster. Plus, I wouldn't trade Favors straight up for Aldridge, let alone adding Exum in the mix.

Post #16 » by **bondom34** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:29 am

Yeah LMA doesn't make much sense in Utah at all. Trade value wise I wouldn't move Favors for him either.

Post #17 » by **Prez** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:36 am

Value might be fine, but I'm holding on to Bender if I'm Phoenix, and looking to move Bledsoe for another young talent. LMA makes little sense for them age wise.

Phoenix needs to sit tight and be consistent with this rebuild. Booker, Chriss, Bender is a terrific starting point...suck this year, get a Dennis Smith Jr, Josh Jackson, or Markelle Fultz to pair with Booker outside, and then start filling the roster out.

NBAMythbuster · Post #18 » by **NBAMythbuster** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:03 am

Spurs don't have any interest in acquiring the oft injured Bledsoe or the raw and unproven Bender. They'll keep the all-nba big man thanks.

patman52 · Post #19 » by **patman52** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 10:47 am

getrichordie wrote:
patman52 wrote:Why does Utah trade a 25 YO favors making 12 mill for a 31 YO Aldridge making 25 with his trade Kicker. Both are under contract for two years. Gobert and Hayward are going to make 25 each next year. And Johnson and Burks make another 20. Hill will be 16-20 more that is a lot of cap money.

It would be a win now move. That's why.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Win what? you think that makes them favorites to beat the spurs-Clippers-Warriors?

patman52 · Post #20 » by **patman52** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 10:52 am

stitches wrote:
getrichordie wrote:
patman52 wrote:Why does Utah trade a 25 YO favors making 12 mill for a 31 YO Aldridge making 25 with his trade Kicker. Both are under contract for two years. Gobert and Hayward are going to make 25 each next year. And Johnson and Burks make another 20. Hill will be 16-20 more that is a lot of cap money.

It would be a win now move. That's why.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

And what do we win? Second place? Are you sure Aldridge is more win now than Favors + Exum?

This trade makes no sense for the Jazz timeline-wise. The very reason Spurs want to do that trade is the same the Jazz don't want to - Aldridge doesn't fit the timeline of the rest of the roster. Plus, I wouldn't trade Favors straight up for Aldridge, let alone adding Exum in the mix.

This is my take, Favors IMO is the more valuable piece at 12 mil,