Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
Moderators: Andre Roberstan, HartfordWhalers, BullyKing, Texas Chuck, MoneyTalks41890, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger, Trader_Joe, loserX
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,542
- And1: 2,477
- Joined: Feb 15, 2005
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
Pelicans adding JJ Reddick and Derrick Favors among others.
"This post wants out of New Orleans" - Woj
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
- Snakebites
- Forum Mod - Pistons
- Posts: 46,527
- And1: 14,751
- Joined: Jul 14, 2002
- Location: Looking not-so-happily deranged
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
Doesn’t Milwaukee get docked for losing Brogdon?
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
- tiderulz
- RealGM
- Posts: 35,560
- And1: 14,095
- Joined: Jun 16, 2010
- Location: Atlanta
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
Snakebites wrote:Doesn’t Milwaukee get docked for losing Brogdon?
and Philly losing JJ Redick and Butler
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,780
- And1: 2,175
- Joined: Dec 05, 2015
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
NoZoLakers wrote:IF OP premise is based on a team that was already a "contender" than only the Bucks should be on this list, also why isn't Philly on this list?
We are talking about acquiring role players here. As mentioned in the OP, star-level players are disregarded in this discussion. Which means Harris and Horford don't count.
Other than those two star players, who did Philly acquired this offseason? Richardson, Scott, Ennis, O'Quinn, and Neto. Meh.
#thevillain
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,504
- And1: 3,358
- Joined: May 20, 2017
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
DeathLineup wrote:NoZoLakers wrote:IF OP premise is based on a team that was already a "contender" than only the Bucks should be on this list, also why isn't Philly on this list?
We are talking about acquiring role players here. As mentioned in the OP, star-level players are disregarded in this discussion. Which means Harris and Horford don't count.
Other than those two star players, who did Philly acquired this offseason? Richardson, Scott, Ennis, O'Quinn, and Neto. Meh.
horford aint no star, so he should be there, he plays like a high lvl role player these days anyways n richardson is as good of an acquisition as anyone on the list
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,780
- And1: 2,175
- Joined: Dec 05, 2015
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
NoZoLakers wrote:DeathLineup wrote:NoZoLakers wrote:IF OP premise is based on a team that was already a "contender" than only the Bucks should be on this list, also why isn't Philly on this list?
We are talking about acquiring role players here. As mentioned in the OP, star-level players are disregarded in this discussion. Which means Harris and Horford don't count.
Other than those two star players, who did Philly acquired this offseason? Richardson, Scott, Ennis, O'Quinn, and Neto. Meh.
horford aint no star, so he should be there, he plays like a high lvl role player these days anyways n richardson is as good of an acquisition as anyone on the list
Horford was selected to 2018 All Star team. 2018 is just a year ago by the way. Furthermore, Horford got paid like a star this summer.
Bottom line, Horford is a star-level player.
#thevillain
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
-
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 11,611
- And1: 7,935
- Joined: Dec 13, 2013
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
This is the Clips. They made a very underrated pick up last season in claiming Mcgruder and his low cap hold for cheap wing talent, brought back Bev and Green on team friendly discounted deals because they wanted to be there, got Zubac back (totally stole him from LAL last season) and didn't lose any key studs from last year other than Gallo and SGA who they turned into PG and Kawhi. They also got Harkless (for a 1st!) and he's nice wing depth.
Rest in peace Mamba. There'll never be another Kobe.
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,168
- And1: 5,726
- Joined: Dec 05, 2016
Re: Which contender did best at acquiring role players?
Utah - Bogdanovic would be a great deal if he was 2 or 3 years, I don’t know about giving him that 4th year. Ed Davis is a great pickup for the price.
Milwaukee - Brook has a chance of being a really bad contract. Not sure why they went 4 years for him other than he had them under a barrel. Hill is ok but again 2 years would have been a better terms for him. Hill looked completely washed in Cleveland and he did have a resurgence with the Bucks but I’d be worried about a regression with him. Robin and Mathews were good deals for them.
Lakers - They are all 2 year deals or less, hard to say they overpaid for any of them. Very cap friendly moves. Had a lot of spaces to fill, added much better shooting than they had last year. Have quite a few guys that can, or can return to being good shooters. Perimeter defense is a question mark with only Danny Green truly being an above average defender in this bunch. Boogie is a low risk, high reward pickup. For nearly the same money this year, would much rather have the diverse abilities of Boogie and McGee who each bring something different to the table to having Zubac. KCP or Rondo (even though he is vet min) would be the most questionable acquisitions for me. Overall pretty good for what they had to work with.
Clippers - I don’t like the Beverley or Zubac deals. Beverley’s defense has fallen off the last couple years and he isn’t good at running an offense. Overall I think the Clippers passing is poor and neither PG nor Kawhi are PG level passers themselves so someone who can run an offense would have been key for me if you are going to spend that much money. Zubac I love the guy but he’s a bench big and 4 for 28 is an overpay, plenty of equal big men you can get on cheaper one or two year deals each year. The center position past the top 5 guys is dime a dozen. Love the Green signing, their best move for me.
Milwaukee - Brook has a chance of being a really bad contract. Not sure why they went 4 years for him other than he had them under a barrel. Hill is ok but again 2 years would have been a better terms for him. Hill looked completely washed in Cleveland and he did have a resurgence with the Bucks but I’d be worried about a regression with him. Robin and Mathews were good deals for them.
Lakers - They are all 2 year deals or less, hard to say they overpaid for any of them. Very cap friendly moves. Had a lot of spaces to fill, added much better shooting than they had last year. Have quite a few guys that can, or can return to being good shooters. Perimeter defense is a question mark with only Danny Green truly being an above average defender in this bunch. Boogie is a low risk, high reward pickup. For nearly the same money this year, would much rather have the diverse abilities of Boogie and McGee who each bring something different to the table to having Zubac. KCP or Rondo (even though he is vet min) would be the most questionable acquisitions for me. Overall pretty good for what they had to work with.
Clippers - I don’t like the Beverley or Zubac deals. Beverley’s defense has fallen off the last couple years and he isn’t good at running an offense. Overall I think the Clippers passing is poor and neither PG nor Kawhi are PG level passers themselves so someone who can run an offense would have been key for me if you are going to spend that much money. Zubac I love the guy but he’s a bench big and 4 for 28 is an overpay, plenty of equal big men you can get on cheaper one or two year deals each year. The center position past the top 5 guys is dime a dozen. Love the Green signing, their best move for me.
Return to Trades and Transactions