ImageImageImage

How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with?

Moderators: theBigLip, dVs33, Snakebites

User avatar
Pharaoh
RealGM
Posts: 13,934
And1: 3,596
Joined: Aug 10, 2001

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#41 » by Pharaoh » Sun Apr 4, 2021 11:46 pm

If it's based on picks and roster alone that's a very short sighted, narrow view.

Roster building takes time, franchise structures take time, continuity takes time.





Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app
buzzkilloton
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,902
And1: 826
Joined: Feb 20, 2017
 

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#42 » by buzzkilloton » Mon Apr 5, 2021 2:57 am

Yeah thats a pretty good rundown Snakebites. I wonder if people think of SAS like myself and is just so used to them being solid we didnt consider it but yeah I'd rather be where we are then SAS. Indy is close but I think they could liquidate and turn out ok. I actually think Fox is good but thats just me.

Really where we end up in this current lotto will be huge. If we end up with another 7 pick were just screwed. If we get a top 3 it puts us over a few more teams. If we landed a Cade then its more. Say we got really lucky and land Cade/Suggs this season and follow it up with Emoni(if he reclassifys) or Chet on another lucky lotto ball then suddenly we are a team others want to be.
Miss you C.Wood
User avatar
Snakebites
Forum Mod - Pistons
Forum Mod - Pistons
Posts: 37,398
And1: 7,741
Joined: Jul 14, 2002
Location: Looking not-so-happily deranged
   

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#43 » by Snakebites » Mon Apr 5, 2021 3:03 am

Pharaoh wrote:If it's based on picks and roster alone that's a very short sighted, narrow view.

Roster building takes time, franchise structures take time, continuity takes time.





Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app

Then you don't like the premise of the thread.

But that nonetheless is the premise.
User avatar
Pharaoh
RealGM
Posts: 13,934
And1: 3,596
Joined: Aug 10, 2001

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#44 » by Pharaoh » Mon Apr 5, 2021 6:05 am

Then I guess I don't like the premise of the thread
Snakebites wrote:
Pharaoh wrote:If it's based on picks and roster alone that's a very short sighted, narrow view.

Roster building takes time, franchise structures take time, continuity takes time.





Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app

Then you don't like the premise of the thread.

But that nonetheless is the premise.


Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app
ByeByeDre
Rookie
Posts: 1,170
And1: 364
Joined: Apr 20, 2017
 

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#45 » by ByeByeDre » Mon Apr 5, 2021 5:13 pm

My updated list:









Washington


They are down a first round pick, and are over the cap. I like Thomas Bryant, but not much else. Yes, Beal could get a haul, but there’s two more years of Westbrook and his contract. I’d take the Pistons situation over that.



Beyond that?

Orlando now has three extra first rounders so I would trade Pistons assets with theirs.

SAC - Fox, Haliburton and others - I would trade

Minny - they’re kind of a crap show, but their top assets are better. It might change after the ping pong balls come out but for now I would trade.

Spurs - to me, toughest one right now - their roster doesn’t scream “awesome” at all, yet they’re a game over .500 in the west? Their players must be good, no? DDR has been outstanding, but if they don’t resign him they would have $55 million to go shopping. It’s another situation that could change with a ping pong ball, but for now I would trade.
Troy Weaver for GM of the year!
User avatar
zeebneeb
RealGM
Posts: 11,591
And1: 4,663
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Location: ANGERVILLE: Population 1
 

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#46 » by zeebneeb » Tue Apr 6, 2021 2:21 am

Snakebites wrote:
Pharaoh wrote:If it's based on picks and roster alone that's a very short sighted, narrow view.

Roster building takes time, franchise structures take time, continuity takes time.





Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app

Then you don't like the premise of the thread.

But that nonetheless is the premise.
1-800-not-a-true-fan
oldncreaky
Senior
Posts: 540
And1: 397
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
Location: A retirement village near you
   

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#47 » by oldncreaky » Fri Apr 9, 2021 9:24 pm

Spoiler:
Snakebites wrote:
Pharaoh wrote:No on the Knicks.

They seem trapped between making the playoffs and letting the kids play.

Plus Thibs...

Randle isn't locked up, Rose isn't locked up

Obi, RJ, Quickley & Robinson have shown potential but there's so many question marks around them.

Also no on:

CHI - look a treadmill situation
CLE - move Love & we'll see
DAL - Luka too good but no help
GSW - age & injuries & cap situation
HOU - ownership
IND - ownership
LAC - will always be little brother
MIN - ownership
ORL - what assets?
SAC - no clue
SAS - father time is undefeated
WAS - Beal situation looms

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app


I'll address each of these, from the following assumptions stated in Laimbeer's OP:

1) Only looking at players, draft picks owed, and other roster-related assets
2) Owernship, coaching, and assumed direction of the team not a part of the equation

If you want to talk about which teams we'd trade overall situations with, that's a slightly different discussion, that might sway a few of these.

In that vein:

Chicago- They're treadmill with their current gameplan, but I think they could liquify those assets and easily have more than what we've got to start our rebuild.

Cleveland- Sexton and Garland are hardly perfect young players but for the moment they're better than we have. A lot depends on whether they keep Jarrett Allen and what he costs.

Dallas- I'd trade like everything we've got on our roster for Luka. You can nitpick but there's no substitute for having a great talent like that- not easily. They belong nowhere near this conversation for that reason alone.

GSW- This one is tricky. Steph is still a great player, but he's surrounded by guys who are either not that good or too young to really work with. I think they can flip the Minny pick and some combination of other assets to get some good players moving forward. The Klay contract gives me pause but I think I'd still swap assets with them.

Hou- Better lottery odds than us and a nice stable of picks. Again, ownership doesn't count.

Indiana- Ditto. But they look like a treadmill and I'm not sure how valuable their assets will be in a couple of years. Unlike Houston they don't have a lot of picks This one is close. Sabonis is better than anything we've got, but we're likely looking at a better pick this year.

LAC- City doesn't count. If you wouldn't trade what we've got for what they've got I don't know what to say. Heck, even if we're including the city.

Minny- They're in a tough spot. I don't love KAT and they owe a precious first rounder to GSW. I think where they're at depends on how much you like Edwards. But yeah.

ORL- Has lots of picks. The fact that they have all of those and got them for their players means they never really should have been considered here IMO. Their assets had value and they're treadmilling no longer.

SAC- I actually think you could make the case that they don't have more value than we do. Fox is making big money but I'm not sure he's a big money player, Heild perpetually wants out, Bagley is meh, and they're not looking at a high pick this time unless they get lucky.

SAS- Not sure why more people aren't including this team here. They have limited assets and per the OP you don't get their organization or other stuff.

WAS- Yeah, this one is here based on the fact that they have Russ. I have pause because Beal could generate a king's ransom of picks if they so choose.


Mostly agree and appreciate the detail , except for

GSW: would be a clear "no" for me. GSW has much better assets, but the kind of luxury tax bills they will be facing to even be competitive during Steph's remaining time would sink most franchises -- and definitely the Pistons

SAC: is a clear yes from me. I think Fox and Haliburton are a good young backcourt
Vinnie became the Microwave in May 1985, zapping the Celtics in Joe Louis
User avatar
Snakebites
Forum Mod - Pistons
Forum Mod - Pistons
Posts: 37,398
And1: 7,741
Joined: Jul 14, 2002
Location: Looking not-so-happily deranged
   

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#48 » by Snakebites » Fri Apr 9, 2021 9:29 pm

oldncreaky wrote:
Spoiler:
Snakebites wrote:
Pharaoh wrote:No on the Knicks.

They seem trapped between making the playoffs and letting the kids play.

Plus Thibs...

Randle isn't locked up, Rose isn't locked up

Obi, RJ, Quickley & Robinson have shown potential but there's so many question marks around them.

Also no on:

CHI - look a treadmill situation
CLE - move Love & we'll see
DAL - Luka too good but no help
GSW - age & injuries & cap situation
HOU - ownership
IND - ownership
LAC - will always be little brother
MIN - ownership
ORL - what assets?
SAC - no clue
SAS - father time is undefeated
WAS - Beal situation looms

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app


I'll address each of these, from the following assumptions stated in Laimbeer's OP:

1) Only looking at players, draft picks owed, and other roster-related assets
2) Owernship, coaching, and assumed direction of the team not a part of the equation

If you want to talk about which teams we'd trade overall situations with, that's a slightly different discussion, that might sway a few of these.

In that vein:

Chicago- They're treadmill with their current gameplan, but I think they could liquify those assets and easily have more than what we've got to start our rebuild.

Cleveland- Sexton and Garland are hardly perfect young players but for the moment they're better than we have. A lot depends on whether they keep Jarrett Allen and what he costs.

Dallas- I'd trade like everything we've got on our roster for Luka. You can nitpick but there's no substitute for having a great talent like that- not easily. They belong nowhere near this conversation for that reason alone.

GSW- This one is tricky. Steph is still a great player, but he's surrounded by guys who are either not that good or too young to really work with. I think they can flip the Minny pick and some combination of other assets to get some good players moving forward. The Klay contract gives me pause but I think I'd still swap assets with them.

Hou- Better lottery odds than us and a nice stable of picks. Again, ownership doesn't count.

Indiana- Ditto. But they look like a treadmill and I'm not sure how valuable their assets will be in a couple of years. Unlike Houston they don't have a lot of picks This one is close. Sabonis is better than anything we've got, but we're likely looking at a better pick this year.

LAC- City doesn't count. If you wouldn't trade what we've got for what they've got I don't know what to say. Heck, even if we're including the city.

Minny- They're in a tough spot. I don't love KAT and they owe a precious first rounder to GSW. I think where they're at depends on how much you like Edwards. But yeah.

ORL- Has lots of picks. The fact that they have all of those and got them for their players means they never really should have been considered here IMO. Their assets had value and they're treadmilling no longer.

SAC- I actually think you could make the case that they don't have more value than we do. Fox is making big money but I'm not sure he's a big money player, Heild perpetually wants out, Bagley is meh, and they're not looking at a high pick this time unless they get lucky.

SAS- Not sure why more people aren't including this team here. They have limited assets and per the OP you don't get their organization or other stuff.

WAS- Yeah, this one is here based on the fact that they have Russ. I have pause because Beal could generate a king's ransom of picks if they so choose.


Mostly agree and appreciate the detail , except for

GSW: would be a clear "no" for me. GSW has much better assets, but the kind of luxury tax bills they will be facing to even be competitive during Steph's remaining time would sink most franchises -- and definitely the Pistons

SAC: is a clear yes from me. I think Fox and Haliburton are a good young backcourt

Yeah, honestly I just kinda forgot about Haliburton.

The Kings are a yes, though after seeing them yesterday I'm less confident on that, I acknowledge it was just one game.
tmorgan
General Manager
Posts: 8,679
And1: 3,734
Joined: Feb 04, 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
   

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#49 » by tmorgan » Yesterday 12:32 am

Snakebites wrote:
oldncreaky wrote:
Spoiler:
Snakebites wrote:
I'll address each of these, from the following assumptions stated in Laimbeer's OP:

1) Only looking at players, draft picks owed, and other roster-related assets
2) Owernship, coaching, and assumed direction of the team not a part of the equation

If you want to talk about which teams we'd trade overall situations with, that's a slightly different discussion, that might sway a few of these.

In that vein:

Chicago- They're treadmill with their current gameplan, but I think they could liquify those assets and easily have more than what we've got to start our rebuild.

Cleveland- Sexton and Garland are hardly perfect young players but for the moment they're better than we have. A lot depends on whether they keep Jarrett Allen and what he costs.

Dallas- I'd trade like everything we've got on our roster for Luka. You can nitpick but there's no substitute for having a great talent like that- not easily. They belong nowhere near this conversation for that reason alone.

GSW- This one is tricky. Steph is still a great player, but he's surrounded by guys who are either not that good or too young to really work with. I think they can flip the Minny pick and some combination of other assets to get some good players moving forward. The Klay contract gives me pause but I think I'd still swap assets with them.

Hou- Better lottery odds than us and a nice stable of picks. Again, ownership doesn't count.

Indiana- Ditto. But they look like a treadmill and I'm not sure how valuable their assets will be in a couple of years. Unlike Houston they don't have a lot of picks This one is close. Sabonis is better than anything we've got, but we're likely looking at a better pick this year.

LAC- City doesn't count. If you wouldn't trade what we've got for what they've got I don't know what to say. Heck, even if we're including the city.

Minny- They're in a tough spot. I don't love KAT and they owe a precious first rounder to GSW. I think where they're at depends on how much you like Edwards. But yeah.

ORL- Has lots of picks. The fact that they have all of those and got them for their players means they never really should have been considered here IMO. Their assets had value and they're treadmilling no longer.

SAC- I actually think you could make the case that they don't have more value than we do. Fox is making big money but I'm not sure he's a big money player, Heild perpetually wants out, Bagley is meh, and they're not looking at a high pick this time unless they get lucky.

SAS- Not sure why more people aren't including this team here. They have limited assets and per the OP you don't get their organization or other stuff.

WAS- Yeah, this one is here based on the fact that they have Russ. I have pause because Beal could generate a king's ransom of picks if they so choose.


Mostly agree and appreciate the detail , except for

GSW: would be a clear "no" for me. GSW has much better assets, but the kind of luxury tax bills they will be facing to even be competitive during Steph's remaining time would sink most franchises -- and definitely the Pistons

SAC: is a clear yes from me. I think Fox and Haliburton are a good young backcourt

Yeah, honestly I just kinda forgot about Haliburton.

The Kings are a yes, though after seeing them yesterday I'm less confident on that, I acknowledge it was just one game.


Does not include Ranadive, right? If it does, then helllllll no.
User avatar
Snakebites
Forum Mod - Pistons
Forum Mod - Pistons
Posts: 37,398
And1: 7,741
Joined: Jul 14, 2002
Location: Looking not-so-happily deranged
   

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#50 » by Snakebites » Yesterday 12:36 am

tmorgan wrote:
Snakebites wrote:
oldncreaky wrote:
Spoiler:


Mostly agree and appreciate the detail , except for

GSW: would be a clear "no" for me. GSW has much better assets, but the kind of luxury tax bills they will be facing to even be competitive during Steph's remaining time would sink most franchises -- and definitely the Pistons

SAC: is a clear yes from me. I think Fox and Haliburton are a good young backcourt

Yeah, honestly I just kinda forgot about Haliburton.

The Kings are a yes, though after seeing them yesterday I'm less confident on that, I acknowledge it was just one game.


Does not include Ranadive, right? If it does, then helllllll no.


Yeah, by the premise of the thread it’s just the players under contract, the picks owned, and any dead money. No coaches/ownership/management.

Ranadive seems more hands off the last few years. I think they’re better off now that Vlade is out.
buzzkilloton
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,902
And1: 826
Joined: Feb 20, 2017
 

Re: How many franchises would you NOT trade all assets with? 

Post#51 » by buzzkilloton » Yesterday 1:45 am

oldncreaky wrote:Mostly agree and appreciate the detail , except for

GSW: would be a clear "no" for me. GSW has much better assets, but the kind of luxury tax bills they will be facing to even be competitive during Steph's remaining time would sink most franchises -- and definitely the Pistons

SAC: is a clear yes from me. I think Fox and Haliburton are a good young backcourt


GS is owed a Minnesota first pick in the coming seasons. This year the pick is top 3 protected. If Minnesota gets top 3 then next season the pick is unprotected. That pick is very very valuable to trade or hold along for what could be an Emoni or Chet in the coming seasons as Minnesota is always awful.
Miss you C.Wood

Return to Detroit Pistons