ImageImageImage

Nuggets Trades

Moderators: THE J0KER, NuggetsWY

NuggetsWY
Forum Mod - Nuggets
Forum Mod - Nuggets
Posts: 8,856
And1: 3,184
Joined: Oct 28, 2015
Location: Cheyenne, WY
 

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#241 » by NuggetsWY » Thu Feb 6, 2020 8:47 pm

Not much of a trade but it's a PG for an SG.

So traded a PF SF SG for a PF 2SF SG. The only upgrade I see is at SF and that was our deepest position IMO. Bates-Diop might be valuable. Danny Green could be nice to have, if we keep him.
manchambo
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,585
And1: 182
Joined: Nov 12, 2004

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#242 » by manchambo » Thu Feb 6, 2020 9:36 pm

skywalker33 wrote:Head scratcher here, McRae doesn't add anything more than a bit more scoring. Guess it does save us another $200K off the salary cap but no draft picks, nothing significant IMO.


Flipping Napier for him makes all the sense in the world. McRae is a a 6'5" SG who hits 38% on 3s. Napier is a guy who would not have played much behind Murray and Morris. With Harris's shooting woes, we may need McRae.
DaFan334
Analyst
Posts: 3,203
And1: 528
Joined: Jul 21, 2006

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#243 » by DaFan334 » Thu Feb 6, 2020 10:40 pm

McCrae seems on paper like a decent replacement for Beasley. This deal seems like we just exchanged fairly equal pieces but got a 1st round pick out of the deal and some youth we can possibly hang onto for a little longer.
Image
skywalker33
Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
Posts: 10,325
And1: 3,778
Joined: Jun 02, 2014
       

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#244 » by skywalker33 » Thu Feb 6, 2020 10:49 pm

manchambo wrote:
skywalker33 wrote:Head scratcher here, McRae doesn't add anything more than a bit more scoring. Guess it does save us another $200K off the salary cap but no draft picks, nothing significant IMO.


Flipping Napier for him makes all the sense in the world. McRae is a a 6'5" SG who hits 38% on 3s. Napier is a guy who would not have played much behind Murray and Morris. With Harris's shooting woes, we may need McRae.


I can easily see flipping Napier, we have no need for 4 PG's on this roster (although Dozier is on a 2-way) but thought this was supposed to be a bigger trade to help compete THIS year, neither trade completes this i.e. the head scratcher
When your days are grey, and your nights are black, it's just different shades of mundane !
The Rebel
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 20,741
And1: 5,949
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
 

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#245 » by The Rebel » Fri Feb 7, 2020 6:29 pm

skywalker33 wrote:
The Rebel wrote:
skywalker33 wrote:
Did you expect them to do this trade ???? I sure didn't see it coming.......


A trade to get worse? Well since the Nurkic trade I prepare myself for a bad trade every deadline, so kind of.


Glad you can see the future, were you the guy who won the Power Ball last week ??? Didn't think so.

You may be right that we're worse, but it was reported both Juancho and Beasley asked for more PT or be traded, so the FO obliged with their player-friendly intent. Beasley already turned down a $10M a year, so trading him seems the best move IMO, we got a 1st for him, right now set at 22 but could be better looking at the moves the Rockets are making.

And honestly, other than his relationship with Jokic (which at worst just became long-distance), he did nothing to justify more mins on this team so moving his was to his advantage.

Lastly, I really liked Vandy's potential here but again he wasn't getting mins and rumors of a poor work ethic were rumbling so he was replaced with KBD, nothing more than a lateral move IMO

Hard to evaluate Vonlah (a present-time backup C/PF), Green (hurt until APR) and Napier (??) as anything more than expirings for two guys we weren't going to resign or that would continue to work the pine, again seems lateral at best. Add in a 1st and it's a minor plus depending on where that HOU pick ends up IMO

I'll wait to see what turns up before projecting what happens with this team who btw, just beat their current divisional rival w/o all these players in UTH for the 1st time in 9 games, something to take not of.


You are missing the entire point, it is not about who we traded, it is about how every year we pretty much know by October who will get traded by the trade deadline. Every year we hear random rumors for months about guys. Every year we finally do a deal right at the end of the trade period, and every year we are wondering what the **** we waited so long for.

It has never been a secret that I am a Juancho fan, it has never been a secret that I see a lot more potential in Beasley than others seem to, Vanderbilt lost my interest this season with his struggles in the Gleague and to get minutes with Millsap being out so much. However like most of us I understood they were going to be traded, it was no secret as soon as they turned down their extensions.

My point is that since the Melodrama 9 years ago our entire trade history looks pretty damn similar to this. Mozgov worked out with us stealing 2 1st round picks for him, it also worked with Joffrey Lauvergne. Other than that we waited too long to trade Chandler, Faried, Nurkic, Mudiay, and now Beasley and Juancho. We never even got around to trading Lyles last year despite it being obvious that he was not going to be kept with all his struggles to find a spot in the rotation so I guess this is better than that.

Just reading the rumors and message boards it is obvious that Beasley and Juancho were much higher in most people's want lists before the season started. The rumors about returns for both were also better. In the end we get 1 st round pick and end of the rotation guys, and I think waiting costs us at least another pick if that was the move they were wanting to make.

As for the guys we end up with, I am fine with the package now that we flipped Napier for McRae. McRae gives us a 3 point shooter off the bench to replace Beasley, Vonleh is a good 5th big that is a good finisher and good defender for his role. I am pretty sure you once wanted us to draft Bates-Diop and after doing some research I think he is going to be better than Vanderbilt is going to end up. A pick in the early 20s with our scouting and front office is a very good thing to have especially considering the contracts that Grant and bringing back or replacing guys like Plumlee and Millsap will cost us this summer. The move makes sense for us, but I cannot help but wonder what we would have gotten back if we did this type of deal in October when those guys turned down their extensions.
skywalker33
Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
Posts: 10,325
And1: 3,778
Joined: Jun 02, 2014
       

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#246 » by skywalker33 » Fri Feb 7, 2020 10:26 pm

The Rebel wrote:
skywalker33 wrote:
The Rebel wrote:
A trade to get worse? Well since the Nurkic trade I prepare myself for a bad trade every deadline, so kind of.


Glad you can see the future, were you the guy who won the Power Ball last week ??? Didn't think so.

You may be right that we're worse, but it was reported both Juancho and Beasley asked for more PT or be traded, so the FO obliged with their player-friendly intent. Beasley already turned down a $10M a year, so trading him seems the best move IMO, we got a 1st for him, right now set at 22 but could be better looking at the moves the Rockets are making.

And honestly, other than his relationship with Jokic (which at worst just became long-distance), he did nothing to justify more mins on this team so moving his was to his advantage.

Lastly, I really liked Vandy's potential here but again he wasn't getting mins and rumors of a poor work ethic were rumbling so he was replaced with KBD, nothing more than a lateral move IMO

Hard to evaluate Vonlah (a present-time backup C/PF), Green (hurt until APR) and Napier (??) as anything more than expirings for two guys we weren't going to resign or that would continue to work the pine, again seems lateral at best. Add in a 1st and it's a minor plus depending on where that HOU pick ends up IMO

I'll wait to see what turns up before projecting what happens with this team who btw, just beat their current divisional rival w/o all these players in UTH for the 1st time in 9 games, something to take not of.


You are missing the entire point, it is not about who we traded, it is about how every year we pretty much know by October who will get traded by the trade deadline. Every year we hear random rumors for months about guys. Every year we finally do a deal right at the end of the trade period, and every year we are wondering what the **** we waited so long for.

It has never been a secret that I am a Juancho fan, it has never been a secret that I see a lot more potential in Beasley than others seem to, Vanderbilt lost my interest this season with his struggles in the Gleague and to get minutes with Millsap being out so much. However like most of us I understood they were going to be traded, it was no secret as soon as they turned down their extensions.

My point is that since the Melodrama 9 years ago our entire trade history looks pretty damn similar to this. Mozgov worked out with us stealing 2 1st round picks for him, it also worked with Joffrey Lauvergne. Other than that we waited too long to trade Chandler, Faried, Nurkic, Mudiay, and now Beasley and Juancho. We never even got around to trading Lyles last year despite it being obvious that he was not going to be kept with all his struggles to find a spot in the rotation so I guess this is better than that.

Just reading the rumors and message boards it is obvious that Beasley and Juancho were much higher in most people's want lists before the season started. The rumors about returns for both were also better. In the end we get 1 st round pick and end of the rotation guys, and I think waiting costs us at least another pick if that was the move they were wanting to make.

As for the guys we end up with, I am fine with the package now that we flipped Napier for McRae. McRae gives us a 3 point shooter off the bench to replace Beasley, Vonleh is a good 5th big that is a good finisher and good defender for his role. I am pretty sure you once wanted us to draft Bates-Diop and after doing some research I think he is going to be better than Vanderbilt is going to end up. A pick in the early 20s with our scouting and front office is a very good thing to have especially considering the contracts that Grant and bringing back or replacing guys like Plumlee and Millsap will cost us this summer. The move makes sense for us, but I cannot help but wonder what we would have gotten back if we did this type of deal in October when those guys turned down their extensions.


Well, if you're saying you are (once again) disappointed, underwhelmed and just think our FO is pathetic because of the results of this trade deadline, I AM WITH YOU.

Right now, I just feel a bit relieved we received something in return for Beasley and Juancho, almost expected them both to walk uncompensated at the end of the year. I did like the KBD in the 2018 draft, he has potential IMO. McRae may surprise me, sure hop so.
When your days are grey, and your nights are black, it's just different shades of mundane !
User avatar
THE J0KER
Forum Mod - Nuggets
Forum Mod - Nuggets
Posts: 5,027
And1: 5,152
Joined: Apr 12, 2017
 

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#247 » by THE J0KER » Fri Feb 7, 2020 11:49 pm

skywalker33 wrote:
Spoiler:
The Rebel wrote:
skywalker33 wrote:
Glad you can see the future, were you the guy who won the Power Ball last week ??? Didn't think so.

You may be right that we're worse, but it was reported both Juancho and Beasley asked for more PT or be traded, so the FO obliged with their player-friendly intent. Beasley already turned down a $10M a year, so trading him seems the best move IMO, we got a 1st for him, right now set at 22 but could be better looking at the moves the Rockets are making.

And honestly, other than his relationship with Jokic (which at worst just became long-distance), he did nothing to justify more mins on this team so moving his was to his advantage.

Lastly, I really liked Vandy's potential here but again he wasn't getting mins and rumors of a poor work ethic were rumbling so he was replaced with KBD, nothing more than a lateral move IMO

Hard to evaluate Vonlah (a present-time backup C/PF), Green (hurt until APR) and Napier (??) as anything more than expirings for two guys we weren't going to resign or that would continue to work the pine, again seems lateral at best. Add in a 1st and it's a minor plus depending on where that HOU pick ends up IMO

I'll wait to see what turns up before projecting what happens with this team who btw, just beat their current divisional rival w/o all these players in UTH for the 1st time in 9 games, something to take not of.


You are missing the entire point, it is not about who we traded, it is about how every year we pretty much know by October who will get traded by the trade deadline. Every year we hear random rumors for months about guys. Every year we finally do a deal right at the end of the trade period, and every year we are wondering what the **** we waited so long for.

It has never been a secret that I am a Juancho fan, it has never been a secret that I see a lot more potential in Beasley than others seem to, Vanderbilt lost my interest this season with his struggles in the Gleague and to get minutes with Millsap being out so much. However like most of us I understood they were going to be traded, it was no secret as soon as they turned down their extensions.

My point is that since the Melodrama 9 years ago our entire trade history looks pretty damn similar to this. Mozgov worked out with us stealing 2 1st round picks for him, it also worked with Joffrey Lauvergne. Other than that we waited too long to trade Chandler, Faried, Nurkic, Mudiay, and now Beasley and Juancho. We never even got around to trading Lyles last year despite it being obvious that he was not going to be kept with all his struggles to find a spot in the rotation so I guess this is better than that.

Just reading the rumors and message boards it is obvious that Beasley and Juancho were much higher in most people's want lists before the season started. The rumors about returns for both were also better. In the end we get 1 st round pick and end of the rotation guys, and I think waiting costs us at least another pick if that was the move they were wanting to make.

As for the guys we end up with, I am fine with the package now that we flipped Napier for McRae. McRae gives us a 3 point shooter off the bench to replace Beasley, Vonleh is a good 5th big that is a good finisher and good defender for his role. I am pretty sure you once wanted us to draft Bates-Diop and after doing some research I think he is going to be better than Vanderbilt is going to end up. A pick in the early 20s with our scouting and front office is a very good thing to have especially considering the contracts that Grant and bringing back or replacing guys like Plumlee and Millsap will cost us this summer. The move makes sense for us, but I cannot help but wonder what we would have gotten back if we did this type of deal in October when those guys turned down their extensions.


Well, if you're saying you are (once again) disappointed, underwhelmed and just think our FO is pathetic because of the results of this trade deadline, I AM WITH YOU.

Right now, I just feel a bit relieved we received something in return for Beasley and Juancho, almost expected them both to walk uncompensated at the end of the year. I did like the KBD in the 2018 draft, he has potential IMO. McRae may surprise me, sure hop so.
I think he explained very well what is wrong here. If they don't want to re-sign extension with Beasley and Juancho, and we know it already since October, why they didn't trade both immediately when Beasley price as TOP5 most efficient "6th man" of last season and Juancho as arguably 3rd best player of FIBA World Cup champions team was by far higher than was now, and JV price was not near zero? Better we didn't do this trade at all because Beasley is so much more useful player than any we get from these two trades, especially for 2020 playoff purposes. Actually, I doubt any of them is more useful than Juancho. If our FO has some secret pick for 2020 draft and (about) #24 pick, nice to hear it, but in reality, there is always a huge difference between June draft results and early draft projections in January, so this gamble can turn into another wasted #24 pick Tyler Lydon.
skywalker33
Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
Posts: 10,325
And1: 3,778
Joined: Jun 02, 2014
       

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#248 » by skywalker33 » Sat Feb 8, 2020 3:57 am

THE J0KER wrote:
skywalker33 wrote:
Spoiler:
The Rebel wrote:
You are missing the entire point, it is not about who we traded, it is about how every year we pretty much know by October who will get traded by the trade deadline. Every year we hear random rumors for months about guys. Every year we finally do a deal right at the end of the trade period, and every year we are wondering what the **** we waited so long for.

It has never been a secret that I am a Juancho fan, it has never been a secret that I see a lot more potential in Beasley than others seem to, Vanderbilt lost my interest this season with his struggles in the Gleague and to get minutes with Millsap being out so much. However like most of us I understood they were going to be traded, it was no secret as soon as they turned down their extensions.

My point is that since the Melodrama 9 years ago our entire trade history looks pretty damn similar to this. Mozgov worked out with us stealing 2 1st round picks for him, it also worked with Joffrey Lauvergne. Other than that we waited too long to trade Chandler, Faried, Nurkic, Mudiay, and now Beasley and Juancho. We never even got around to trading Lyles last year despite it being obvious that he was not going to be kept with all his struggles to find a spot in the rotation so I guess this is better than that.

Just reading the rumors and message boards it is obvious that Beasley and Juancho were much higher in most people's want lists before the season started. The rumors about returns for both were also better. In the end we get 1 st round pick and end of the rotation guys, and I think waiting costs us at least another pick if that was the move they were wanting to make.

As for the guys we end up with, I am fine with the package now that we flipped Napier for McRae. McRae gives us a 3 point shooter off the bench to replace Beasley, Vonleh is a good 5th big that is a good finisher and good defender for his role. I am pretty sure you once wanted us to draft Bates-Diop and after doing some research I think he is going to be better than Vanderbilt is going to end up. A pick in the early 20s with our scouting and front office is a very good thing to have especially considering the contracts that Grant and bringing back or replacing guys like Plumlee and Millsap will cost us this summer. The move makes sense for us, but I cannot help but wonder what we would have gotten back if we did this type of deal in October when those guys turned down their extensions.


Well, if you're saying you are (once again) disappointed, underwhelmed and just think our FO is pathetic because of the results of this trade deadline, I AM WITH YOU.

Right now, I just feel a bit relieved we received something in return for Beasley and Juancho, almost expected them both to walk uncompensated at the end of the year. I did like the KBD in the 2018 draft, he has potential IMO. McRae may surprise me, sure hop so.
I think he explained very well what is wrong here. If they don't want to re-sign extension with Beasley and Juancho, and we know it already since October, why they didn't trade both immediately when Beasley price as TOP5 most efficient "6th man" of last season and Juancho as arguably 3rd best player of FIBA World Cup champions team was by far higher than was now, and JV price was not near zero? Better we didn't do this trade at all because Beasley is so much more useful player than any we get from these two trades, especially for 2020 playoff purposes. Actually, I doubt any of them is more useful than Juancho. If our FO has some secret pick for 2020 draft and (about) #24 pick, nice to hear it, but in reality, there is always a huge difference between June draft results and early draft projections in January, so this gamble can turn into another wasted #24 pick Tyler Lydon.


Rebel, rightly so, has always maintained our FO has repeatedly held on too long to trade their player. I think everyone including myself agrees with that. My point was he was denigrating the trade before even evaluating the incoming players, I don't think that's quite fair. I do think Beasley was the best player involved but after he turned down $30M (didn't that offer come in Oct ?) we all knew he wasn't going to be here next year, so getting SOMETHING for him (and wasn't our asking price a 1st ?) was the best scenario. And correct me if I'm wrong, was Beasley doing anything early in the season to help his value ??? NO, he was so inconsistent (his main criticism) he was only averaging 5ppg thru the 1st 20 games . Juancho ??? It's my opinion he just has more loyalty to FIBA than the NBA, he's always played so much better there than for the Nuggets, but there are different rules that work better for him.

And love how you are already equating the 2020 1st we got from HOU (who are losing to the Suns tonight) to Tyler Lydon, our WORST draft pick in the last 10 years, nice way to try and validate your disingenuous post. But go back to your stat boards to try to make whatever point you want, I'll agree or refute....it's all good !!
When your days are grey, and your nights are black, it's just different shades of mundane !
The Rebel
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 20,741
And1: 5,949
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
 

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#249 » by The Rebel » Sat Feb 8, 2020 6:55 am

skywalker33 wrote:
Spoiler:
THE J0KER wrote:
skywalker33 wrote:
Well, if you're saying you are (once again) disappointed, underwhelmed and just think our FO is pathetic because of the results of this trade deadline, I AM WITH YOU.

Right now, I just feel a bit relieved we received something in return for Beasley and Juancho, almost expected them both to walk uncompensated at the end of the year. I did like the KBD in the 2018 draft, he has potential IMO. McRae may surprise me, sure hop so.
I think he explained very well what is wrong here. If they don't want to re-sign extension with Beasley and Juancho, and we know it already since October, why they didn't trade both immediately when Beasley price as TOP5 most efficient "6th man" of last season and Juancho as arguably 3rd best player of FIBA World Cup champions team was by far higher than was now, and JV price was not near zero? Better we didn't do this trade at all because Beasley is so much more useful player than any we get from these two trades, especially for 2020 playoff purposes. Actually, I doubt any of them is more useful than Juancho. If our FO has some secret pick for 2020 draft and (about) #24 pick, nice to hear it, but in reality, there is always a huge difference between June draft results and early draft projections in January, so this gamble can turn into another wasted #24 pick Tyler Lydon.


Rebel, rightly so, has always maintained our FO has repeatedly held on too long to trade their player. I think everyone including myself agrees with that. My point was he was denigrating the trade before even evaluating the incoming players, I don't think that's quite fair. I do think Beasley was the best player involved but after he turned down $30M (didn't that offer come in Oct ?) we all knew he wasn't going to be here next year, so getting SOMETHING for him (and wasn't our asking price a 1st ?) was the best scenario. And correct me if I'm wrong, was Beasley doing anything early in the season to help his value ??? NO, he was so inconsistent (his main criticism) he was only averaging 5ppg thru the 1st 20 games . Juancho ??? It's my opinion he just has more loyalty to FIBA than the NBA, he's always played so much better there than for the Nuggets, but there are different rules that work better for him.


Do not assume I did not evaluate the trade, I know who these guys are and have watched them often enough to understand why they did what they did. If we are being honest 1 out of the 3 we got back out of that trade was what I would consider any kind of need.

It is obvious that we needed a 3rd string C that would not bitch if he didn't get minutes but could play well enough to help us as the bench has been struggling on defense since Plumlee went out and nobody really wants Jokic being run into the ground at this point of the season.

I will say that I made a mistake on KDB in that I thought he was older than he was, for some reason I thought he was in his 4th year. However I do not see him as any kind of need, even losing Vanderbilt and Juancho we still have Millsap, Grant, Craig and now Vonleh who can fill the defensive forward when needed at the 3 or 4. Maybe KDB will improve on his shooting as I know he showed some ability in college, but I am not so interested in a prospect with him behind MPJ, Cancar and Bol especially if we bring back Grant.

Napier I did not understand the need at all other than salary filler. Call me crazy but I would rather have Dozier as our 3rd PG and we needed a scoring SG off the bench. We need a guy that defenders have to cover to spread the floor with Plumlee being the backup C, just to give MPJ and Morris room to slash. However we don't need another PG who is best with the ball in his hands to be the backup undersized SG.

As for McRae, he is a guy that has bounced in and out of the league, he has been pretty good this year, but he is still a bench scorer that is an end of the rotation guy for a good team. I doubt he gets a lot of minutes, but when he is needed he will work as hard as he can and he has to be guarded at the 3 point line.

I also said in my post that there has to be a follow up move, trading Napier for McRae makes the entire 2 deals make sense, even if we can all agree that it was not the value that we would have seen if we did this the minute they found out they were far apart in their expectations for the next deal.

I fully agree that neither Juancho nor Beasley helped their value this season, which is why we should have traded before the season started. There is no way that the Nuggets front office did not know they were off on values before the start of the year. This whole waiting until guys request trades is why we end up getting the short end of the stick on so many deals. Why not be proactive and just tell guys that we don't think we can make the numbers work, would you like to discuss being moved?

I understand the need to downgrade, fact is Juancho and Beasley both have proven they have enough talent to deserve a real chance at minutes. Partially due to Malone's preference for Craig's defense and partially due to their own issues the only real chance either ever got was because of injuries the last couple of years. They are good enough to get decent contracts next summer, and they were never going to get enough minutes to prove their value here. There is no way that any of us would be happy in that situation, but there are plenty of guys who can fill the roles you needed filled for cheap who don't have the talent to do a lot more. Flipping Napier for McRae made the guys coming back make more sense for our team needs, although I still wish they would have put something together months ago when we could have gotten more compensation for this type of deal.


skywalker33 wrote:And love how you are already equating the 2020 1st we got from HOU (who are losing to the Suns tonight) to Tyler Lydon, our WORST draft pick in the last 10 years, nice way to try and validate your disingenuous post. But go back to your stat boards to try to make whatever point you want, I'll agree or refute....it's all good !!


I agree a late 1st with our front office has a lot of value, I just think it would have been nice to get another pick or two even if they were 2nd rounders so that we can find 1 good one.
Manolito
Sophomore
Posts: 231
And1: 152
Joined: Dec 29, 2018
   

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#250 » by Manolito » Sat Feb 8, 2020 3:49 pm

I recall that Terence Davis was on our Summer League roster, and now he would be a perfect fit for us.

Do you know if PJ Dozier is going to be promoted to NBA roster after speding its 45 days as a two way contract?



Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using RealGM mobile app
Manolito
Sophomore
Posts: 231
And1: 152
Joined: Dec 29, 2018
   

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#251 » by Manolito » Sun Feb 9, 2020 4:05 pm

What kind of offer do you think could bring Beal here next sommer?

Barton + Harris + Morris + Bol Bol + HOU 2020 + DEN 2022 x Beal + Ish Smith?

Is that enough?

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using RealGM mobile app
NuggetsWY
Forum Mod - Nuggets
Forum Mod - Nuggets
Posts: 8,856
And1: 3,184
Joined: Oct 28, 2015
Location: Cheyenne, WY
 

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#252 » by NuggetsWY » Sun Feb 9, 2020 8:14 pm

Manolito wrote:What kind of offer do you think could bring Beal here next sommer?

Barton + Harris + Morris + Bol Bol + HOU 2020 + DEN 2022 x Beal + Ish Smith?

Is that enough?

Based on what the Lakers had to give up for Davis - although Beal might be cheaper, it'll still be a lot; I'd say it's going to take at least Barton + Harris + a couple of young players and 2-3 1sts. So I think your offer is close, but maybe a little light.
TunaFish
Analyst
Posts: 3,010
And1: 1,920
Joined: Apr 08, 2005

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#253 » by TunaFish » Sun Feb 9, 2020 11:12 pm

My take on the reporting surrounding our attempts to trade for either Bertans or Holliday is that MPJ was the target. I can't see any chance we would trade MPJ outside of a blockbuster that's not likely.
Canned in Denver.
NuggetsWY
Forum Mod - Nuggets
Forum Mod - Nuggets
Posts: 8,856
And1: 3,184
Joined: Oct 28, 2015
Location: Cheyenne, WY
 

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#254 » by NuggetsWY » Mon Feb 10, 2020 12:45 am

TunaFish wrote:My take on the reporting surrounding our attempts to trade for either Bertans or Holliday is that MPJ was the target. I can't see any chance we would trade MPJ outside of a blockbuster that's not likely.

Yeah, if I'm Washington trading Beal, I'd tell Denver Porter must be included (or Murray). If I'm Denver, I say no way - and I would love to see Beal next to Murray. But I like Porter's future potential more than the reality of Beal today.

Bertans is going to be a free agent and if we let Millsap walk, Bertans would be my favorite PF to play behind Grant - looking at skillset & probably salary.
skywalker33
Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
Posts: 10,325
And1: 3,778
Joined: Jun 02, 2014
       

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#255 » by skywalker33 » Mon Feb 10, 2020 12:57 am

For that kinda price I'd of rather just paid Beasley
When your days are grey, and your nights are black, it's just different shades of mundane !
TunaFish
Analyst
Posts: 3,010
And1: 1,920
Joined: Apr 08, 2005

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#256 » by TunaFish » Mon Feb 10, 2020 1:32 am

skywalker33 wrote:For that kinda price I'd of rather just paid Beasley


Beasley wanted to start. Could Denver have guaranteed that?
Canned in Denver.
skywalker33
Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
Posts: 10,325
And1: 3,778
Joined: Jun 02, 2014
       

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#257 » by skywalker33 » Mon Feb 10, 2020 1:41 am

TunaFish wrote:
skywalker33 wrote:For that kinda price I'd of rather just paid Beasley


Beasley wanted to start. Could Denver have guaranteed that?


With Malone, very questionable...but if Beasley could CONSISTENTLY put up like he did in his MIN debut, I'd gladly move Harris to the bench !!
When your days are grey, and your nights are black, it's just different shades of mundane !
TunaFish
Analyst
Posts: 3,010
And1: 1,920
Joined: Apr 08, 2005

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#258 » by TunaFish » Mon Feb 10, 2020 3:42 am

skywalker33 wrote:
TunaFish wrote:
skywalker33 wrote:For that kinda price I'd of rather just paid Beasley


Beasley wanted to start. Could Denver have guaranteed that?


With Malone, very questionable...but if Beasley could CONSISTENTLY put up like he did in his MIN debut, I'd gladly move Harris to the bench !!


Point taken. Nuggets have made a decision, hopefully the right decision, to stay with Harris. Obviously related to defense.
Canned in Denver.
skywalker33
Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
Posts: 10,325
And1: 3,778
Joined: Jun 02, 2014
       

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#259 » by skywalker33 » Mon Feb 10, 2020 3:50 am

Just a note, since we received the 2020 HOU 1st, they have lost 2 of the 3 games since the trade and have been out rebounded 137-102 over those 3 games...I'm thinking that pick looks good to drop from it's current 22 pick to around 17-19. I'l be watching that pick over the rest of the season, especially with Doncic and Oladipo returning after the All-Star break
When your days are grey, and your nights are black, it's just different shades of mundane !
Manolito
Sophomore
Posts: 231
And1: 152
Joined: Dec 29, 2018
   

Re: Nuggets Trades 

Post#260 » by Manolito » Mon Feb 10, 2020 6:39 am

I don't want the Rockets to fall down from 5th seed. We are going to be most likely 2nd or 3rd and a pick 19 instead of 22 does not compensate facing the Rockets in the first round.

Regarding Beasley, IMHO it was not him or Harris, It was him or Barton. He would have probably signed something close to 40Mx3 and that is exactly Barton's contract

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using RealGM mobile app

Return to Denver Nuggets