NBA Trade Thread #11

yifsuibfe1 · Post #1521 » by **yifsuibfe1** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 1:52 am

Classic Bulls

ChiefILL53 · Post #1522 » by **ChiefILL53** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 1:58 am

jordanwilliams6 wrote:Why would anyone take Collins or Huerter? The only reason we would trade them is to bring in assets but no one in their right mind would give us an asset either.

Both are solid role players but horrifically overpaid for what they produce and are contracted until the end of next season. Next season is when they might actually have some value as expirings.

we should have gotten extra picks for taking their contracts, but AKME were too brain dead to ask for something from Sac, even tho we were sending them Zach. I guess you can say the spurs gave us our pick back for taking Collins, but the Kings gave us nothing for taking on Huerter and giving them Zach lol.

SfBull · Post #1523 » by **SfBull** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:14 am

Jimmy traded for GSW.Not sure if this trade will stop the Warriors' interest on Vuc.

cubd8 · Post #1524 » by **cubd8** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:16 am

Does Vuc fit anywhere or is considered a good player (stat filler) on a bad team?

ChiTownHero1992 · Post #1525 » by **ChiTownHero1992** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:21 am

cubd8 wrote:Does Vuc fit anywhere or is considered a good player (stat filler) on a bad team?

I mean Warriors still need a C but they'd be a tough sell without depleting all their depth

Pelicans could use a C

Mavericks were rumored to be looking at a Gafford swap

If Lakers strike out on a "ball-lob threat" like they want, they are in desperate need of size

Dan Z · Post #1526 » by **Dan Z** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 5:38 am

Muzbar wrote:Welp! I guess Vuc is here after the deadline.

I knew the Zach trade would be all they would do.

I'm not surprised, but it's a shame. Will they re-visit trade talks in the off season? I have my doubts.

Dan Z · Post #1527 » by **Dan Z** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 5:39 am

Betta Bulleavit wrote:

Read on Twitter
?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet&mx=2

It's crazy that Butler got a 2 year 112 million extension. Why give him that? I know he had a player option for 52 million, but he's 35 years old.

Guru · Post #1528 » by **Guru** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 5:49 am

Mark Williams to the Lakers for a ton.

Easily would have done that deal for Vuc. I assume they didn't offer it as they were prioritizing D

ScrantonBulls · Post #1529 » by **ScrantonBulls** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 5:52 am

Guru wrote:Mark Williams to the Lakers for a ton.

Easily would have done that deal for Vuc

Nobody is giving that much for Vuc's bum ass.

Guru · Post #1530 » by **Guru** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 5:53 am

ScrantonBulls wrote:
Guru wrote:Mark Williams to the Lakers for a ton.

Easily would have done that deal for Vuc

Nobody is giving that much for Vuc's bum ass.

OK

Dan Z · Post #1531 » by **Dan Z** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 5:54 am

ChiefILL53 wrote:
jordanwilliams6 wrote:Why would anyone take Collins or Huerter? The only reason we would trade them is to bring in assets but no one in their right mind would give us an asset either.

Both are solid role players but horrifically overpaid for what they produce and are contracted until the end of next season. Next season is when they might actually have some value as expirings.

we should have gotten extra picks for taking their contracts, but AKME were too brain dead to ask for something from Sac, even tho we were sending them Zach. I guess you can say the spurs gave us our pick back for taking Collins, but the Kings gave us nothing for taking on Huerter and giving them Zach lol.

I don't think AK values draft picks all that much, which is crazy. I'm not sure if they could've got a pick from Sacramento, but I agree with your point and think they should've tried (maybe they did?). The DDR sign and trade they could've taken the pick swap, but decided not to (they would've had to take Barnes too).

The Caruso trade many people thought they should've gotten a pick in that deal too.

Dan Z · Post #1532 » by **Dan Z** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 5:56 am

Guru wrote:Mark Williams to the Lakers for a ton.

Easily would have done that deal for Vuc. I assume they didn't offer it as they were prioritizing D

Why would the Lakers give up that much for Vucevic?

Mark Williams is 23 years old and improving. Vucevic is 34 years old.

Muzbar · Post #1533 » by **Muzbar** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 5:57 am

Guru wrote:
ScrantonBulls wrote:
Guru wrote:Mark Williams to the Lakers for a ton.

Easily would have done that deal for Vuc

Nobody is giving that much for Vuc's bum ass.

OK

He's right.

Moreso about the value.

Chi town · Post #1534 » by **Chi town** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 6:04 am

Mark Williams is always hurt.

Big risk overpay for Lakers.

Guru · Post #1535 » by **Guru** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 6:13 am

Dan Z wrote:
Guru wrote:Mark Williams to the Lakers for a ton.

Easily would have done that deal for Vuc. I assume they didn't offer it as they were prioritizing D

Why would the Lakers give up that much for Vucevic?

Mark Williams is 23 years old and improving. Vucevic is 34 years old.

Nowhere does it say the Lakers would give up that much for Vuc.

Guru · Post #1536 » by **Guru** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 6:14 am

Muzbar wrote:
Guru wrote:
ScrantonBulls wrote:Nobody is giving that much for Vuc's bum ass.

OK

He's right.

Moreso about the value.

Great.....my post didn't say "I expect this much for Vooch"

Dan Z · Post #1537 » by **Dan Z** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 6:26 am

Guru wrote:
Dan Z wrote:
Guru wrote:Mark Williams to the Lakers for a ton.

Easily would have done that deal for Vuc. I assume they didn't offer it as they were prioritizing D

Why would the Lakers give up that much for Vucevic?

Mark Williams is 23 years old and improving. Vucevic is 34 years old.

Nowhere does it say the Lakers would give up that much for Vuc.

My bad. I misread, but why even mention that you'd take the same deal for Vucevic? Of course you would! We'd all be happy if that happened.

The reality is he's not worth that much.

NecessaryEvil · Post #1538 » by **NecessaryEvil** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 6:27 am

Yeah, Vooch isn’t the mob threat a player like Luka needs.

I’m still hopeful he’ll be moved by tomorrow.

Would be nice if we could package Coby + Vooch.

Dan Z · Post #1539 » by **Dan Z** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 6:38 am

NecessaryEvil wrote:Yeah, Vooch isn’t the mob threat a player like Luka needs.

I’m still hopeful he’ll be moved by tomorrow.

Would be nice if we could package Coby + Vooch.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Bulls don't make any more moves, but I'd be disappointed.

I don't think Vucevic will have better trade value in the off season and it's time to move on. Time to think about the future.

Muzbar · Post #1540 » by **Muzbar** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 6:51 am

Dan Z wrote:
Guru wrote:
Dan Z wrote:
Why would the Lakers give up that much for Vucevic?

Mark Williams is 23 years old and improving. Vucevic is 34 years old.

Nowhere does it say the Lakers would give up that much for Vuc.

My bad. I misread, but why even mention that you'd take the same deal for Vucevic? Of course you would! We'd all be happy if that happened.

The reality is he's not worth that much.

Exactly!

I easily would have done the deal the Lakers got for Anthony Davis but for Zach LaVine.