Trade pick #7 to GSW for #2 to draft Lamelo Ball?

[SAKURABA216]

Assuming that either Wiseman or Okungwu are still on the board at # 7 and assuming GSW drafts Lamelo at #2 since he would have the highest trade value of any available prospect, would you guys consider sending GSW whatever they want in our cupboards (outside of a future #1) to land Lamelo?

I love Rose, but there is no way he wants to be here much longer and is our most valuable trade asset. We could package Rose and either Kennard or Sekou and pick #7 for Looney, Poole, filler, and pick #2. Lamelo may not be perfect, but he could add some much needed excitement to this team and could be throwing up lobs to Blake and possibly Woods.

[MotownMadness]

No I wouldn't do that, don't think Lamelo is worth it. Would rather run with a Hayes and Sekou french connection and trade Rose for a additional asset.

[DBC10]

No I wouldn’t do it. He has no discipline since he’s been raised to play that way his entire basketball life see his Australian career, they literally let him do whatever he wanted and they had a terrible record. He’s going to take the worst shots and he’s not really going to play defense much at all.

[Billl]

If wiseman falls to #7, you just take him. It's not ideal, but he's BPA by a wide margin by that point. Anyway, we really don't have much/anything GSW would want. They are looking for vets that will be difference makers.

[flow]

I wouldn't take Melo Ball at #2, much less trade up to #2 for him.

[bstein14]

Blake +#7 for Wiggins +#2 works straight up and makes some sense for both teams.

I'd go Wiseman #2 assuming Edwards is gone #1.

[Manocad]

Sure, right after I gouge my eye out with a dull spoon

[Pharaoh]

According to "experts" Ball is not worth trading up to get and we'll get a comparable prospect at 7.

No point giving up assets to move up IMO

Sent from my SM-A520F using RealGM mobile app

[buzzkilloton]

Nobody worth trading up for this season. Just sit back and hope we take the right guy.

[Uncle Mxy]

Sure, right after I gouge Manocad's eye out with a dull spoon.
Glad to see you're willing to make that sacrifice over a silly pick. Manocad.

[Crymson]

Blake +#7 for Wiggins +#2 works straight up and makes some sense for both teams.

Golden State trades a perennially healthy guy who might contribute for a guy who's almost guaranteed to become injured and doesn't fit their roster, and we get to move up?

I find this unlikely.

[mattao313]

Blake +#7 for Wiggins +#2 works straight up and makes some sense for both teams.

Golden State trades a perennially healthy guy who might contribute for a guy who's almost guaranteed to become injured and doesn't fit their roster, and we get to move up?

I find this unlikely.

Wiggins is a net negative player on a terrible contract. Blake's health is a problem but he is a good player and has a year less on his contract.

[flow]

Blake +#7 for Wiggins +#2 works straight up and makes some sense for both teams.

Golden State trades a perennially healthy guy who might contribute for a guy who's almost guaranteed to become injured and doesn't fit their roster, and we get to move up?

I find this unlikely.

Wiggins is a net negative player on a terrible contract. Blake's health is a problem but he is a good player and has a year less on his contract.

So, what do we want with a net negative player on a terrible contract?

.

[Manocad]

Sure, right after I gouge Manocad's eye out with a dull spoon.
Glad to see you're willing to make that sacrifice over a silly pick. Manocad.

And leave me eyeless? Cold, man. Just cold.

[Crymson]

Wiggins is a net negative player on a terrible contract. Blake's health is a problem but he is a good player and has a year less on his contract.

Wiggins just finished a resurgent season, as he posted 21 PPG on acceptable efficiency. He's got his issues, and he's still worth far less than his salary, but he's reliably healthy and fits well into Golden State's system. Blake is perennially injured, functionally missed an entire season in which he looked far worse than ever in his limited time on the court, may never regain his prior level of performance, and fits terribly into Golden State's system and its roster. And in exchange for acquiring his contract, the Warriors would lose flexibility in the draft.

Blake is, at the present time, a massively negative trade asset. He can't be relied upon to remain on the floor, and there are very few rosters onto which he would fit well. Looking at the rosters of the current playoff teams, I can see none that would benefit from disrupting its current roster to bring Blake and his fit-dependency onto the team.

[mattao313]

Golden State trades a perennially healthy guy who might contribute for a guy who's almost guaranteed to become injured and doesn't fit their roster, and we get to move up?

I find this unlikely.

Wiggins is a net negative player on a terrible contract. Blake's health is a problem but he is a good player and has a year less on his contract.

So, what do we want with a net negative player on a terrible contract?

.

I wouldn't do the trade. I'm just saying the trade isn't that bad for the Warriors

[DetroitDon15]

This type of post belongs on the trade board. If there isn’t a rumor to suppose the idea, please keep it there.

[chrbal]

This type of post belongs on the trade board. If there isn’t a rumor to suppose the idea, please keep it there.

Why not just make a sticked trade proposal thread?

[DetroitDon15]

This type of post belongs on the trade board. If there isn’t a rumor to suppose the idea, please keep it there.

Why not just make a sticked trade proposal thread?

I’m cool with one over trade thread for this offseason. I just don’t need this board to turn into crazy trade offer board.

[MotownMadness]

Rose+Kennard and #7
For
Wiggins and #2

Only if Edwards is there