RealGM

Malone has said that Mudiay's "DNP-coaches decision" are all about winning now and making the P.Os.

If, however, the Nuggets believe that Murray actually can be the desired starting scorer PG, then Mudiay - like Nurkic before him - needs to be traded.

One team really in need of a starting PG is the Bulls. I'd like to see them get a guy like Mudiay - even being skeptical that they have the right coaching staff to develop him - who COULD turn into a very solid starter.

What would you guys think about trading him to the Bulls - who are looking more and more like a surefire lottery team - for a top 8 protected 2017 pick or an unprotected 2018 1st pick and Cameron Payne who would make a serviceable backup PG?

And, yes, I know that this ranks on the border of a fantasy league suggestion.

Last night I saw him look lost on the bench, same facial expression as Nurkic's when he was with Denver , I think he should get some time on the court every game , Malone is not managing him very well.

Well, Murray-Harris with Mudiay as backup to both sounds like it might be very nice. Some think he should be trade, some think he'll still work out. His style of play is a different mix of skills than Murray or Harris.

Chicago just traded for Payne. Are they ready to give up on him already?

If Chicago wants Mudiay, it'd probably take more than a single pick. Perhaps Cameron Payne works. However, a top-8 protected seems a rather silly "protection". It might as well be top-3 protected. Chicago is not going to get 4-8. But that's not important.

Personally, I wouldn't be in favor of trading Mudiay, but for a 2017 pick plus Payne, I wouldn't be upset.

NuggetsWY wrote:Well, Murray-Harris with Mudiay as backup to both sounds like it might be very nice. Some think he should be trade, some think he'll still work out. His style of play is a different mix of skills than Murray or Harris.

Chicago just traded for Payne. Are they ready to give up on him already?

If Chicago wants Mudiay, it'd probably take more than a single pick. Perhaps Cameron Payne works. However, a top-8 protected seems a rather silly "protection". It might as well be top-3 protected. Chicago is not going to get 4-8. But that's not important.

Personally, I wouldn't be in favor of trading Mudiay, but for a 2017 pick plus Payne, I wouldn't be upset.

Mudiay goes from starter to injury list to DNP to end of the bench. Exactly who is going to trade us for this guy? And you want a first?
Nuggets sure know how to kill player;s trade value.

Too early to give up on Mudiay

When they drafted Mudiay they knew he was a 2 year project, and said as much many times in interviews, while his progress has been disappointing I think now is a terrible time to give up on the guy. Especially if he is still working as hard as he was last year. In fact I build the bench partially around him being the backup PG to Murray. Get a SG and SF that can be a spot up shooter, if you think that Hernan-Gomez is a 4 than you trade Arthur and let Gallo walk or trade Chandler, and go get a SG& SF through the draft or free agency or the trade, resign Plumlee. Than you have 3 shooters with Plumlee and Mudiay off the bench, and let him run the bench.

The Rebel said:

When they drafted Mudiay they knew he was a 2 year project, and said as much many times in interviews, while his progress has been disappointing I think now is a terrible time to give up on the guy. Especially if he is still working as hard as he was last year. In fact I build the bench partially around him being the backup PG to Murray. Get a SG and SF that can be a spot up shooter, if you think that Hernan-Gomez is a 4 than you trade Arthur and let Gallo walk or trade Chandler, and go get a SG& SF through the draft or free agency or the trade, resign Plumlee. Than you have 3 shooters with Plumlee and Mudiay off the bench, and let him run the bench.

The question isn't simply whether or not we think Mudiay will get better. It seems apparent the "braintrust" has no faith in him compared to the even less experienced Murray to help them make the P.O.s

Jokic, Harris, Murray, Juancho, Plumlee and, yes, Gallo, should be looked at as the core next year. Miller, Nelson and Faried should be gone. If Hibbert wants to sign a low end contract, he'd be okay as a 3rd center. Barton, at 3.5 mill, should certainly back as should Beasley.

That leaves Arthur at 7.5 mill, Chandler at 12.5 mill and Mudiay. So those three plus Faried are possible trade chips, BUT for what?

I would really commit to the starters being Harris, Murray, Jokic, Gallo and Juancho with Plumlee get PT at Center and PF.

The only position that I would see packaging any of the trade chips for is a two-way PF who is clearly much better as a 34-35 MPG starter than the Juancho/Plumlee combo.

The Mudiay for a 1st round pick plus Payne just gives the Nugz some insurance at backup PG.

JerrySloan wrote:The Rebel said:

When they drafted Mudiay they knew he was a 2 year project, and said as much many times in interviews, while his progress has been disappointing I think now is a terrible time to give up on the guy. Especially if he is still working as hard as he was last year. In fact I build the bench partially around him being the backup PG to Murray. Get a SG and SF that can be a spot up shooter, if you think that Hernan-Gomez is a 4 than you trade Arthur and let Gallo walk or trade Chandler, and go get a SG& SF through the draft or free agency or the trade, resign Plumlee. Than you have 3 shooters with Plumlee and Mudiay off the bench, and let him run the bench.

The question isn't simply whether or not we think Mudiay will get better. It seems apparent the "braintrust" has no faith in him compared to the even less experienced Murray to help them make the P.O.s

Jokic, Harris, Murray, Juancho, Plumlee and, yes, Gallo, should be looked at as the core next year. Miller, Nelson and Faried should be gone. If Hibbert wants to sign a low end contract, he'd be okay as a 3rd center. Barton, at 3.5 mill, should certainly back as should Beasley.

That leaves Arthur at 7.5 mill, Chandler at 12.5 mill and Mudiay. So those three plus Faried are possible trade chips, BUT for what?

I would really commit to the starters being Harris, Murray, Jokic, Gallo and Juancho with Plumlee get PT at Center and PF.

The only position that I would see packaging any of the trade chips for is a two-way PF who is clearly much better as a 34-35 MPG starter than the Juancho/Plumlee combo.

The Mudiay for a 1st round pick plus Payne just gives the Nugz some insurance at backup PG.

While there are a few people that have given up on Mudiay, neither the coach nor the front office are saying that and there are a lot of fans that think he still has a great deal of potential. Your take on next year's core and who should be back/gone is rather fascinating and certainly not in keeping with the general consensus around here, especially with what Malone considers his core this year or next.

Your comment regarding the need for a two-way PF is very out of perspective. Faried fits well off the bench. Plumlee is mostly a center but is effective at PF for short periods while Hernangomez hasn't seen enough minutes to prove much plus the Nuggets have Arthur, a very serviceable backup PF and Cornelie is stashed and possibly coming over, not to mention Malone's favorite PF, Chandler. Drafting a PF seems like a ridiculous strategy, even assuming Chandler & Faried were both traded.

Retaining Barton is also interesting and they will probably do just that, <sigh> but with Harris starting and Murray earning more minutes at SG and Beasley waiting in the wings, a player of Barton's talent seems to be either a waste or a road block for younger players' development.

JerrySloan wrote:The Rebel said:

When they drafted Mudiay they knew he was a 2 year project, and said as much many times in interviews, while his progress has been disappointing I think now is a terrible time to give up on the guy. Especially if he is still working as hard as he was last year. In fact I build the bench partially around him being the backup PG to Murray. Get a SG and SF that can be a spot up shooter, if you think that Hernan-Gomez is a 4 than you trade Arthur and let Gallo walk or trade Chandler, and go get a SG& SF through the draft or free agency or the trade, resign Plumlee. Than you have 3 shooters with Plumlee and Mudiay off the bench, and let him run the bench.

The question isn't simply whether or not we think Mudiay will get better. It seems apparent the "braintrust" has no faith in him compared to the even less experienced Murray to help them make the P.O.s

So do they not have any faith in Beasley, Hernangomez, or Mike Miller? It appears that Malone made the call on starting Nelson due to the push to make the playoffs. I have read nothing to indicate that the Nuggets are ready to dump him for nothing.

JerrySloan wrote:Jokic, Harris, Murray, Juancho, Plumlee and, yes, Gallo, should be looked at as the core next year. Miller, Nelson and Faried should be gone. If Hibbert wants to sign a low end contract, he'd be okay as a 3rd center. Barton, at 3.5 mill, should certainly back as should Beasley.

LOL, you really have no clue what the front office is thinking do you? Miller is not going anywhere until he is good and ready, most Nuggets fans know and accept that fact as there are plenty of reasons behind the scenes that Bulls fans would never understand.

Plumlee and Gallo are both free agents, and last I checked the Nuggets have about $43 million in cap space, if they get the contracts most expect they end up with about $5 million in cap space, if that is their main plan than they need fired. Go look at the SF free agents and convince me it is a coincidence that Gallo is a free agent after only a 2 year extension and that the rumors of them shopping Gallo and Chandler are just a coincidence.

I have already explained in another thread that Faried fits in just fine with Jokic, with the 2 of the starting together and both being healthy the Nuggets are 6-2, even having them just start with Faried having the back issues they are 7-5, so why should he be gone?

Barton is also a terrible fit on a team that runs things through their bigs and their PGs, have you even started to wonder why Barton has been terrible since Plumlee started playing and Murray has been allowed to play more PG? I do not care what he gets paid, he has to be moved.

JerrySloan wrote:That leaves Arthur at 7.5 mill, Chandler at 12.5 mill and Mudiay. So those three plus Faried are possible trade chips, BUT for what?

Yes the Nuggets should trade their best defensive bench big who also happens to shoot almost 46% from 3 as a spot up shooter for the hell of it, considering one of their issues is not having enough spacing off the bench. Great idea. So what is your problem with Arthur? Especially considering you are not a Nuggets fan and we know you do not watch the team.

Chandler can go, his attitude sucks, and he does not really fit into the system either.

The Nuggets have no need to trade Mudiay, even at worst he is a 3rd stringer, but I am going to guess it is much more likely that they trade Nelson.

As I said unless Faried has long term problem with his back he should not be traded.

JerrySloan wrote:I would really commit to the starters being Harris, Murray, Jokic, Gallo and Juancho with Plumlee get PT at Center and PF.

Once again signing those 2 puts the Nuggets at the salary cap, and gives them limited ways in the future to build the team as Harris is also due his extension next year. Meaning this is their 1 year that they have the chance to upgrade this team, Gallo is not a perfect fit in a motion offense, and he is not far from starting his decline with all his injury problems, no way I sign him for $20 million plus per year.

Juancho has done nothing to earn a starting position at PF over Faried, in fact he has just really earned a rotation spot in the last month. This team is not going to chase the playoffs this year and then start Murray and Juancho next year, Juancho will continue to come off the bench until he unseats Faried.

JerrySloan wrote:The only position that I would see packaging any of the trade chips for is a two-way PF who is clearly much better as a 34-35 MPG starter than the Juancho/Plumlee combo.

The Mudiay for a 1st round pick plus Payne just gives the Nugz some insurance at backup PG.

The Nuggets have enough PFs, and saying that is the only need is ignorant, that is far from their biggest need considering they have 3 highly productive PFs and will likely have Plumlee and one of Gallo or Chandler who will also get minutes at PF. Their biggest long term need is at SF, they could also use a backup SG that fits their system, then they can worry about upgrading PF unless they believe that hernangomez is actually a long term answer at PF like most Nuggets fans believe.

The Bulls just got Cameron Payne. They won't trade him plus a first for Mudiay.

Dan Z wrote:The Bulls just got Cameron Payne. They won't trade him plus a first for Mudiay.

Didn't think so. Wasn't our idea. Talk to Jerry Sloan. I think most of the Nuggets' fans are OK with not making that trade.

I remain reluctant to trading Mudiay because he's young and definitely has a lot of room to grow and improve. Problem is, he seem to have lost Malone's trust and the DNPs / meager playing time, simply impedes his development.

Hopefully Mudiay doesn't get dealt. I'd like to see him regain Malone's confidence as well as that starting spot. Him and Murray should be the PGs of this franchise for years to come.

FilNugsFan wrote:I remain reluctant to trading Mudiay because he's young and definitely has a lot of room to grow and improve. Problem is, he seem to have lost Malone's trust and the DNPs / meager playing time, simply impedes his development.

Hopefully Mudiay doesn't get dealt. I'd like to see him regain Malone's confidence as well as that starting spot. Him and Murray should be the PGs of this franchise for years to come.

Malone surely does run hot and cold on young players - not a good way to build/teach them IMO

JerrySloan wrote:
If, however, the Nuggets believe that Murray actually can be the desired starting scorer PG, then Mudiay - like Nurkic before him - needs to be traded.

This depend on whether or not Mudiay accepts a bench role. When Nurkic was benched, he quit on the team and half-assed the few opportunities he got. It became clear that Nurkic would no longer give full effort to this team and could not be the backup we wanted him to be. We'll see how Mudiay deals with this demotion. Hopefully he can become a steady 20-25 mpg player next season. I see no reason to trade him now while his value is at its lowest unless he pulls a Nurk and quits on the team.

MidMountain wrote:

JerrySloan wrote:
If, however, the Nuggets believe that Murray actually can be the desired starting scorer PG, then Mudiay - like Nurkic before him - needs to be traded.

This depend on whether or not Mudiay accepts a bench role. When Nurkic was benched, he quit on the team and half-assed the few opportunities he got. It became clear that Nurkic would no longer give full effort to this team and could not be the backup we wanted him to be. We'll see how Mudiay deals with this demotion. Hopefully he can become a steady 20-25 mpg player next season. I see no reason to trade him now while his value is at its lowest unless he pulls a Nurk and quits on the team.

I agree, a poor assumption just to try and validate a trade. Mudiay seems much more of a team player than Nurkic, we'll see going forward.

The Rebel said:

A heck of a lot of things, some of which I wll respond to, but since he felt free to call me ignorant and was more than dismissive of my knowledge and awareness of the team compared to his own, we will see if I can be allowed to be equally so without being suspended or banned.

BTW, I've been following the Nugz since I moved to Colorado in 1976, watching the likes of David Thompson, Dan Issel, Bobby Jones, George McGinnis, T.R. Dunn, Alex English, Kiki, Hanzlik, Dikembe, etc.

A.) Where did I not show any faith in Juancho or Beasley?? That is a pretty ignorant comment since I advocated Juancho starting next year and I said that Beasley would obviously still be on the team. As for Miller, you are likely correct in assuming he will be back as chief baby sitter although it would be much more intelligent for him to be made an assistant coach.

B.) Nowhere did I say that Mudiay WON'T be back next year. I do believe that it is better than fifty-fifty that he will. That said, I have little-to-no confidence Malone and his current staff are the ones who are very likely to succeed in developing his obvious talent.

C.) Your comment that Faried "fits in just fine" with Jokic makes sense if you are yearning for a continuation of the 110 points per game BOTH by and against the Nugz. There is no way whatsoever, that Faried's undersized lack of man D at the PF spot combines well with Jokic less than stellar interior D.

D.) I have to say that it is your ignorance showing to believe that the Nuggets have 3 "highly productive" PFs and that you agree not only that Plumlee will get meaningful PT at PF and Chandler, whom it is apparent you believe should be kept, will also continue to get time there. So, in your scenario, it seems that you are happy with Malone continuing his merry-go-round of changing rotations next year.

The incontrovertible fact is that Faried is an overall defensive liability at PF against any team with a bigger, offensively talented PF and Arthur, while a very servicable backup PF - whom I DID NOT say SHOULD, but only could, be a trade chip, becomes another guy looking for PT among the five guys you seem to want to keep that can - and, right now, do - play PF.

E.) In trashing my choice of PF as the potentially biggest need, IF the Nugz could somehow snag a top two way player at that position, you fail to identify the position that you believe is the one with the greatest need.

In fact, from your responses to my post, it seems as you think that aside from moving on from Barton and Nelson, you are quite content to watch the next installment of rotation by whatever comes to Malone's mind for a given game again next year.

SInce I follow both the Nugz and Bulls, I am way past tired of watching this kind of "coaching" from both Malone and Hoiberg(or their FO bosses) .

While your offer isn't terrible (doubt CHI or DEN would do it though) Mudiay still has untapped potential that needs to be explored before trading him away for the unknown. You may "follow" the Nuggets, but you don't have their best interest in mind which says you'd like to prey upon them.....not one true Nuggets fan supports your offer, just walk away while you're behind.

JerrySloan wrote:The Rebel said:

A heck of a lot of things, some of which I wll respond to, but since he felt free to call me ignorant and was more than dismissive of my knowledge and awareness of the team compared to his own, we will see if I can be allowed to be equally so without being suspended or banned.

BTW, I've been following the Nugz since I moved to Colorado in 1976, watching the likes of David Thompson, Dan Issel, Bobby Jones, George McGinnis, T.R. Dunn, Alex English, Kiki, Hanzlik, Dikembe, etc.

Maybe you should actually watch a few games if you are such a Nuggets fan, and considering your comments here and throughout the board we all know you are a Bulls fan and do not watch the Nuggets. Also if you want to try to attack me than be an adult about it and actually quote me instead of editing so it does not notify me when you do it as i know you are hoping I do not see it.

JerrySloan wrote:A.) Where did I not show any faith in Juancho or Beasley?? That is a pretty ignorant comment since I advocated Juancho starting next year and I said that Beasley would obviously still be on the team. As for Miller, you are likely correct in assuming he will be back as chief baby sitter although it would be much more intelligent for him to be made an assistant coach.

Your argument is that since Mudiay is on the bench that the Nuggets front office and coaching staff have no faith in him, so explain to me why if that is the case they have not lost faith in Juancho or Beasley, or any other player that is not playing? IF a player is on the bench they have no faith in the guy according to you. You are right that is a very ignorant statement, but you are the one that made it not me.

Once again it is not about being a babysitter, it is about being a player mentor, and it is about the relationship between Bret Bearup and Mike Miller, and the relationship between Bret Bearup and Stan Kroenke. If you have been following the Nuggets as long as you say (which I doubt considering your username and the fact that you are a Bulls fan) than you should be old enough to understand a little about workplace relationships, coaches are managers, players are coworkers, coworkers will always have a different relationship than a worker and management. Miller decides what he is going to do and there is no reason to bitch about him. Reportedly he is very close to Jokic, he spends many hours working out with and encouraging the young players like Beasley, Hernangomez, murray, Mudiay, and Jokic. Spend some time reading up on what happens to many of the young Euro players, who end up in the NBA without any players to take them under their wing, and than maybe you will see why Miller is the unsung hero of this team. Of course if you had been following the NBA for so long I would not have to tell you that many young players especially from Europe and Asia struggle with everything that goes with being in the NBA, why not have someone who is on the team specifically to help them?

JerrySloan wrote:B.) Nowhere did I say that Mudiay WON'T be back next year. I do believe that it is better than fifty-fifty that he will. That said, I have little-to-no confidence Malone and his current staff are the ones who are very likely to succeed in developing his obvious talent.

Maybe they will succeed maybe they won't but reality is Mudiay is a terrible fit in the starting lineup right now, and Murray has been outplaying him. Fact is with the push to make the playoffs no coach in the NBA would be playing him over Nelson
right now, he has not done enough to show that he can even run the 2nd team full time. he has no right to complain he was given his chance and is obviously not the player for the franchise to build around.

JerrySloan wrote:C.) Your comment that Faried "fits in just fine" with Jokic makes sense if you are yearning for a continuation of the 110 points per game BOTH by and against the Nugz. There is no way whatsoever, that Faried's undersized lack of man D at the PF spot combines well with Jokic less than stellar interior D.

LOL, man quit taking the word of a bunch of fans from other teams that have no idea what they are talking about and actually watch some games, look at advanced defensive stats, you might learn something. According to the eye test and all advanced defensive stats Faried is a top 3/4 defender on the Nuggets roster right now. Arguing that he is a terrible defender only shows more how little you know about the team.

JerrySloan wrote:D.) I have to say that it is your ignorance showing to believe that the Nuggets have 3 "highly productive" PFs and that you agree not only that Plumlee will get meaningful PT at PF and Chandler, whom it is apparent you believe should be kept, will also continue to get time there. So, in your scenario, it seems that you are happy with Malone continuing his merry-go-round of changing rotations next year.

So wait your argument against the Nuggets having 3 productive PFs is that the lineup is constantly changing? Are you ignoring the injuries the last few months, where Faried, Gallo, Chandler, and Arthur have all spent several games out of the lineup due to injuries and Arthur is still on a minutes restriction? That is not an argument against the Nuggets having productive PFs that is just proof that you have nothing to base your arguments on, such as your last paragraph talking about Faried being a terrible defense, you just continue to prove your ignorance.

Also please quote me where I have ever said that I wanted to keep Chandler, once again you are just proving that you do not actually read responses and are borderline trolling to cause trouble.

JerrySloan wrote:The incontrovertible fact is that Faried is an overall defensive liability at PF against any team with a bigger, offensively talented PF and Arthur, while a very servicable backup PF - whom I DID NOT say SHOULD, but only could, be a trade chip, becomes another guy looking for PT among the five guys you seem to want to keep that can - and, right now, do - play PF.

Yep despite the eye test from people who watch the team, despite all the advanced stats, Faried is a defensive liability. Or it could just be a fact that you have no clue what you are talking about?

JerrySloan wrote:E.) In trashing my choice of PF as the potentially biggest need, IF the Nugz could somehow snag a top two way player at that position, you fail to identify the position that you believe is the one with the greatest need.

Actually if you actually read what I wrote I clearly define what I believe the Nuggets biggest needs are. But yes if the Nuggets can get a top player at ever position other than center than they should do it, but that is a different discussion than what a team's biggest need is and I believe you know that.

JerrySloan wrote:In fact, from your responses to my post, it seems as you think that aside from moving on from Barton and Nelson, you are quite content to watch the next installment of rotation by whatever comes to Malone's mind for a given game again next year.

SInce I follow both the Nugz and Bulls, I am way past tired of watching this kind of "coaching" from both Malone and Hoiberg(or their FO bosses) .

Reading is your friend, I clearly have said multiple times including in my response to you that one of Gallo or Chandler has to go.

As for your complaints about Malone, sure his rotation should not be changing nightly, but for some strange reason the rotation in the backcourt has been settled for about 2 months now, the rotation at Center has been steady since Plumlee arrived, so what could be the reason that the rotation is constantly changing at the forward spots? Couldn't be injuries could it? If that is the biggest issue a person can find with a coach than that is a good coach. Truth is Malone has some issues, but his forward rotation is not even close to the most alarming.

But actually let's move Mudiay and whatever that's not Murray/Harris/Jokic for Bledsoe during the offseason

U hova wrote:But actually let's move Mudiay and whatever that's not Murray/Harris/Jokic for Bledsoe during the offseason

Bledsoe? I'd rather get a small forward like Porter.