Trade up to #7 for Drummond Thread

Piston Pete · Post #1 » by **Piston Pete** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:18 am

I thought I'd start this thread to discuss what our best offer might be and also look at rival teams who might look to trade up with Golden State for the #7 pick.

Our best offer might be 9/39/44 for 7/52. We could even add Maxiell/Bynum (expirings) for Beans if needed.

Houston has picks 14/16 and might also dangle a Dalembert/Beans swap.

Portland has picks 11/40/41 and I think can take on some salary.

Not sure NO can gather the assets to trade up. They now have a depleted roster and #10 -- unless they were to take on BOTH Beans and Jefferson for Shard along with #10)

I don't think Milwaukee has the assets to trade up (expirings for Beans and #12?) unless they include their 2013 pick.

As far as packages go....we should have the best to offer. Whether or not we offer it is another question entirely. New core;

Knight
Stuckey
Prince / Singler / Daye?
Monroe / Jerebko
Drummond / Macklin

MichiganMan1 · Post #2 » by **MichiganMan1** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:28 am

Like the pick swap idea. GS basically will get the same type of player at 9 while also getting two higher 2nds in the process. No future assets and no players involved could make this a very clean deal that should leave both sides happy. I'm tempted to go over to the GS board and see if they'd be okay with it.

Piston Pete · Post #3 » by **Piston Pete** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:30 am

MichiganMan1 wrote:Like the pick swap idea. GS basically will get the same type of player at 9 while also getting two higher 2nds in the process. No future assets and no players involved could make this a very clean deal that should leave both sides happy. I'm tempted to go over to the GS board and see if they'd be okay with it.

Done

Jodi · Post #4 » by **Jodi** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:39 am

Piston Pete wrote:Our best offer might be 9/39/44 for 7/52. We could even add Maxiell/Bynum (expirings) for Beans if needed.

Good trade idea...

He Filled it Up · Post #5 » by **He Filled it Up** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:49 am

Totally depends on who GSW wants. I have no idea who that is, but if it's someone that is a ways off from 7-9 then ultimately I think we'd have to take on Beans. Otherwise Portland/ Houston would beat us (especially if they're thinking SF).

I really think Portland will grab Drummond at 6, but I guess we should hope that GSW falls in love with PJIII.

Jodi · Post #6 » by **Jodi** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:01 am

^^I been saying for a while that I think the Warriors will take PJ3...

bkseven · Post #7 » by **bkseven** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:06 am

Piston Pete wrote:I thought I'd start this thread to discuss what our best offer might be and also look at rival teams who might look to trade up with Golden State for the #7 pick.

Our best offer might be 9/39/44 for 7/52. We could even add Maxiell/Bynum (expirings) for Beans if needed.

Houston has picks 14/16 and might also dangle a Dalembert/Beans swap.

Portland has picks 11/40/41 and I think can take on some salary.

Not sure NO can gather the assets to trade up. They now have a depleted roster and #10 -- unless they were to take on BOTH Beans and Jefferson for Shard along with #10)

I don't think Milwaukee has the assets to trade up (expirings for Beans and #12?) unless they include their 2013 pick.

As far as packages go....we should have the best to offer. Whether or not we offer it is another question entirely. New core;

Knight
Stuckey
Prince / Singler / Daye?
Monroe / Jerebko
Drummond / Macklin

GSW has 4 picks in the 2012 draft. They have already said that they do not need 4 picks, so I have no idea why you would offer more picks.

FlipTSO · Post #8 » by **FlipTSO** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:24 am

imo, 9/39/44 for 7/52 would be our least offer. I think our best offer would be #9 + 2013 #1.

Giving up that pick next year is what would seal the deal and get us #7 if we wanted, in my opinion.

Joe showed he's willing to use it in a trade if needed, when he offered it for McGee. I think it'll just come down to how much Joe likes Drummond, because we have the assets to move up. Does he like him as much as we do is the question?

pistons · Post #9 » by **pistons** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 7:30 am

I don't think the 2 seconds would entice GS very much .. They are on record as trying to move the 4 picks they already have so getting them an extra 2nd probably won't appeal to them very much.

pistons · Post #10 » by **pistons** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 7:32 am

FlipTSO wrote:imo, 9/39/44 for 7/52 would be our least offer. I think our best offer would be #9 + 2013 #1.

Giving up that pick next year is what would seal the deal and get us #7 if we wanted, in my opinion.

Joe showed he's willing to use it in a trade if needed, when he offered it for McGee. I think it'll just come down to how much Joe likes Drummond, because we have the assets to move up. Does he like him as much as we do is the question?

I could definitely see GS doing this on the other hand , as they may have to convey their pick to Utah. I'd want it at least top 10 protected tho.

ComboGuardCity · Post #11 » by **ComboGuardCity** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 7:42 am

I would trade the unprotected 2013 and #9. This team I going to be better next year and I think well be in the 12-16 range. I think most people would be willing to trade 9 and 14 to move up and snag a potential star.

FlipTSO · Post #12 » by **FlipTSO** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 7:57 am

ComboGuardCity wrote:I would trade the unprotected 2013 and #9. This team I going to be better next year and I think well be in the 12-16 range. I think most people would be willing to trade 9 and 14 to move up and snag a potential star.

yep, hopefully Joe sees the light as well. Just think about a Monroe/Drummond frontcourt with a Knight/Stuckey backcourt. He would be the perfect fit, not only with Monroe, but for the starting 5 as a whole. You got the skill/high IQ of Knight and Monroe, and then the physical/athletic power players in Stuckey and Drummond. I think those 4 would just compliment each other perfect and can envision so many great plays between them.

Joe hasnt been able to make a big splash in years. Landing Drummond would make up for a lot of lost time, and pretty much compete building his main young core for the next decade.

If we stay at and take one of the 2nd rate bigs, I feel like we'll be looking to upgrade that position again in 3 yrs when Monroe/Knight far surpass him in talent. Drummond has the talent to grow equally with them and reach the same potential or even higher.

The Moose · Post #13 » by **The Moose** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 10:31 am

Hopefully Dumars makes a trade for the first time in 3 yrs.
Drummond seems like such a down to earth good bloke as well.

I agree that Knight/Stuckey/Prince/Monroe/Drummond would all compliment each other. But we need to get rid of prince or at least make an upgrade. There is no point of staying at 9. We should either move up to 6 or 7 or move down to 14 and 16

Piston Pete · Post #14 » by **Piston Pete** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 2:23 pm

pistons wrote:I don't think the 2 seconds would entice GS very much .. They are on record as trying to move the 4 picks they already have so getting them an extra 2nd probably won't appeal to them very much.

9/39/44 for 7/52 gives them:

9, 30, 35, 39, 44 -- more than enough ammo to package 2nd rounders to trade up into the 1st round at least one.

NW · Post #15 » by NW » Fri Jun 22, 2012 2:56 pm

Piston Pete wrote:
pistons wrote:I don't think the 2 seconds would entice GS very much .. They are on record as trying to move the 4 picks they already have so getting them an extra 2nd probably won't appeal to them very much.

9/39/44 for 7/52 gives them:

9, 30, 35, 39, 44 -- more than enough ammo to package 2nd rounders to trade up into the 1st round at least one.

But not necessary. Already reported that the Warriors would look to talk to teams like Miami and OKC who ate trying to move their picks to avoid another guaranteed contract.

Not sure if there's a deal to be made as neither guy GS has interest in (Drummond and Waiters) will be there at 9 most likely. PJ3 is a non factor. His workout with GS was pretty bad-couldn't shoot a lick.

Piston Pete · Post #16 » by **Piston Pete** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 2:59 pm

GS is said to be interested in Ross, Waiters, Zeller....among others.

At least a couple of those guys will be there at #9.

NW · Post #17 » by NW » Fri Jun 22, 2012 3:07 pm

Piston Pete wrote:GS is said to be interested in Ross, Waiters, Zeller....among others.

At least a couple of those guys will be there at #9.

Zeller and Ross are second tier choices. If you want a team to trade down from their first tier choices to 2nd tier (choices predicated on guys like Drummond, Lillard etc. being off the board) you are going to have to make it worth their while

Post #18 » by **Snakebites** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 3:22 pm

Yes, MORE Drummond threads!

There are never enough Drummond threads!

DLeagueAllStars · Post #19 » by **DLeagueAllStars** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 3:56 pm

Havent seen a deal yet that moves the warriors off their pick is Drummond is there

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

Jodi · Post #20 » by **Jodi** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 3:59 pm

^Drummond would ruin his career if we went to the Warriors...You guys have no talent outside of Klay and maybe injury prone Curry...The Warriors need to pick PJ3, Waiters, Zeller, Ross or Sullinger...Let Drummond come the Pistons where he can flourish next to Monroe...