Wolves | Magic | Spurs

Moderators: pacers33granger, Mamba4Goat, Andre Roberstan, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck, Trader_Joe, loserX

azwfan
General Manager
Posts: 8,302
And1: 1,343
Joined: May 21, 2004
     

Re: Wolves | Magic | Spurs 

Post#21 » by azwfan » Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:14 pm

rugbyrugger23 wrote:
azwfan wrote:
rugbyrugger23 wrote:You can’t really think that is fair value?

Murray to Magic could work, just not ideal with him about to be paid, and not that 23/24 is old by any means, just not as ideal as full rookie contracts and draft picks with where this trade takes them.

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.


You may think Culver and #17 (which is almost the best case scenario) for Gordon is good value... but i don't. I find it terrible value. Unless AG got injured and I wasn't aware? Or demanded to be traded? I'd rather have Gordon by a considerable amount. Mid to late 1sts and unproven rookies in a flat & weak draft class don't exactly jump start a rebuild effort.

Additionally, I still can't figure out why the Magic would want to trade 23 yo Gordon even if they aren't making the playoffs. If the Magic are going to be tearing down and starting over, its going to be Ross, Vucevic, and Fournier that are dealt. Gordon is kept or dealt for a better fit or packaged with other assets for an available star.

If in 6 months Culver looks like a really nice player - then it may look better, but at this point... its really quite a bit off.

I think you are confusing personal choice vs. value. On the flip side I would say the flat draft myth is just you trying to drive down value of recent #7 overall.

If I am buying a house and don’t like the color or any features of my personal choice, I can try claiming the value is not worth what the market will bear — but the market is the market. If someone’s are lined up to say the house is worth asking price — you saying that it isn’t is just a personal choice.

This thread isn’t about trading Vooch (who would have some value), Fournier (negative value) or Ross (negative value), who if Magic tear It down probably try and move as well. Don’t know a thread had to involve the entire organization course of action.

Added: in any draft, #7 overall for Gordon on draft day is a overpay. Since the “drive off the lot” value and a player being attached (vs. Magic getting to draft who they may prefer if not Culver) I can see the need for more value — hence the 1st being added.

No, you are confusing your opinion with fact. Once again, all evidence suggests the Magic aren't interested in this offer. Had they been interested, they would have traded with the Suns at the time of the draft and Magic fans don't seem to hot on it either. That should tell you all you need to know about "fair" value.
LF75 wrote: It was a dumb idea..And yes I'm a dick.
jbk1234
Forum Mod - Cavs
Forum Mod - Cavs
Posts: 36,150
And1: 20,618
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
   

Re: Wolves | Magic | Spurs 

Post#22 » by jbk1234 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:20 pm

I think Culver is going to have to demonstrate some on-the-court worth before teams evaluate him like this. Gordon was also a top-10 pick. He's demonstrated his on-the-court value and his contract is hardly onerous. I don't see the Magic saying flat out *no* so much as check back with us later in the season. Spurs probably have a similar response.
It is highly unlikely that the Cavs will agree with your Kevin Love evaluation for the purpose of a trade.
rugbyrugger23
General Manager
Posts: 7,878
And1: 905
Joined: Jun 07, 2011

Re: Wolves | Magic | Spurs 

Post#23 » by rugbyrugger23 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:38 pm

azwfan wrote:
rugbyrugger23 wrote:
azwfan wrote:
You may think Culver and #17 (which is almost the best case scenario) for Gordon is good value... but i don't. I find it terrible value. Unless AG got injured and I wasn't aware? Or demanded to be traded? I'd rather have Gordon by a considerable amount. Mid to late 1sts and unproven rookies in a flat & weak draft class don't exactly jump start a rebuild effort.

Additionally, I still can't figure out why the Magic would want to trade 23 yo Gordon even if they aren't making the playoffs. If the Magic are going to be tearing down and starting over, its going to be Ross, Vucevic, and Fournier that are dealt. Gordon is kept or dealt for a better fit or packaged with other assets for an available star.

If in 6 months Culver looks like a really nice player - then it may look better, but at this point... its really quite a bit off.

I think you are confusing personal choice vs. value. On the flip side I would say the flat draft myth is just you trying to drive down value of recent #7 overall.

If I am buying a house and don’t like the color or any features of my personal choice, I can try claiming the value is not worth what the market will bear — but the market is the market. If someone’s are lined up to say the house is worth asking price — you saying that it isn’t is just a personal choice.

This thread isn’t about trading Vooch (who would have some value), Fournier (negative value) or Ross (negative value), who if Magic tear It down probably try and move as well. Don’t know a thread had to involve the entire organization course of action.

Added: in any draft, #7 overall for Gordon on draft day is a overpay. Since the “drive off the lot” value and a player being attached (vs. Magic getting to draft who they may prefer if not Culver) I can see the need for more value — hence the 1st being added.

No, you are confusing your opinion with fact. Once again, all evidence suggests the Magic aren't interested in this offer. Had they been interested, they would have traded with the Suns at the time of the draft and Magic fans don't seem to hot on it either. That should tell you all you need to know about "fair" value.

Since when are these trade scenarios based on Magic fans interest in a offer. Fans aren’t interested unless some kind of huge overpay for “their guy.” Then the non fan of that team doesn’t like the scenario because it is a scenario not based in reality.

If you think this scenario is a direction the Magic aren’t looking to go — cool state why in a response. Have a take on value (assuming they might consider such a direction) and even chime in on what their actual GM might think (in your opinion).

I just don’t see the reasoning to click on a thread for your team, be flabbergasted with a scenario unless it is not a overpay that would get you to sign on. Any trade scenario here that is worth discussion is going to walk a fine line of value and direction for any organization — more so when a non 12th man scenario is broached.

Added: perfect example of this is your ROSS for Mills + Murray suggestion. If that was my OP and when you clicked on thread, got you to say as Magic fan, “Yes, let’s do this trade scenario,” that is not based in value reality (Spurs fans should be insulted).
rugbyrugger23
General Manager
Posts: 7,878
And1: 905
Joined: Jun 07, 2011

Re: Wolves | Magic | Spurs 

Post#24 » by rugbyrugger23 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:43 pm

jbk1234 wrote:I think Culver is going to have to demonstrate some on-the-court worth before teams evaluate him like this. Gordon was also a top-10 pick. He's demonstrated his on-the-court value and his contract is hardly onerous. I don't see the Magic saying flat out *no* so much as check back with us later in the season. Spurs probably have a similar response.

I can see that line of thinking at this time in the offseason.

Draft day: #6 and Spurs 1st is the overpay Magic need to say yes (probably just the #6).

Present Day: your take probably holds more true.

During Season: Culver looks studly — Wolves don’t consider. Culver looks crappy — Magic don’t consider. Murray looks studly — Spurs don’t consider. Murray looks crappy — Wolves don’t consider. A fine line no doubt.
User avatar
j-ragg
RealGM
Posts: 16,279
And1: 9,790
Joined: Mar 31, 2005
Location: the don't re-sign Hedo bandwagon.
   

Re: Wolves | Magic | Spurs 

Post#25 » by j-ragg » Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:45 pm

I'd do it if I were higher on Culver, I'm just super low on him personally. But if it were for the draft pick in early June instead of the player, I'd probably do it just to balance this goofy roster.
BadMofoPimp wrote:Durant thinks Vooch is one of the Best Centers in the NBA. I will take his word over a couch-GM yelling at a TV.
jbk1234
Forum Mod - Cavs
Forum Mod - Cavs
Posts: 36,150
And1: 20,618
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
   

Re: Wolves | Magic | Spurs 

Post#26 » by jbk1234 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:15 pm

rugbyrugger23 wrote:
jbk1234 wrote:I think Culver is going to have to demonstrate some on-the-court worth before teams evaluate him like this. Gordon was also a top-10 pick. He's demonstrated his on-the-court value and his contract is hardly onerous. I don't see the Magic saying flat out *no* so much as check back with us later in the season. Spurs probably have a similar response.

I can see that line of thinking at this time in the offseason.

Draft day: #6 and Spurs 1st is the overpay Magic need to say yes (probably just the #6).

Present Day: your take probably holds more true.

During Season: Culver looks studly — Wolves don’t consider. Culver looks crappy — Magic don’t consider. Murray looks studly — Spurs don’t consider. Murray looks crappy — Wolves don’t consider. A fine line no doubt.


I'm not entirely convinced that the Magic say yes on draft day. A lot of teams were meh on this draft after Morant and Zion. If they had a guy they really liked that was still on the board, they say yes. If they didn't, probably not. They had just made the playoffs for the first time in a long time and it's not easy to turn around and trade win-now talent for an unproven rookie under those circumstances.

I think Gordon goes on the block if Fultz doesn't work out.
It is highly unlikely that the Cavs will agree with your Kevin Love evaluation for the purpose of a trade.
azwfan
General Manager
Posts: 8,302
And1: 1,343
Joined: May 21, 2004
     

Re: Wolves | Magic | Spurs 

Post#27 » by azwfan » Wed Sep 11, 2019 9:07 pm

rugbyrugger23 wrote:
azwfan wrote:
rugbyrugger23 wrote:I think you are confusing personal choice vs. value. On the flip side I would say the flat draft myth is just you trying to drive down value of recent #7 overall.

If I am buying a house and don’t like the color or any features of my personal choice, I can try claiming the value is not worth what the market will bear — but the market is the market. If someone’s are lined up to say the house is worth asking price — you saying that it isn’t is just a personal choice.

This thread isn’t about trading Vooch (who would have some value), Fournier (negative value) or Ross (negative value), who if Magic tear It down probably try and move as well. Don’t know a thread had to involve the entire organization course of action.

Added: in any draft, #7 overall for Gordon on draft day is a overpay. Since the “drive off the lot” value and a player being attached (vs. Magic getting to draft who they may prefer if not Culver) I can see the need for more value — hence the 1st being added.

No, you are confusing your opinion with fact. Once again, all evidence suggests the Magic aren't interested in this offer. Had they been interested, they would have traded with the Suns at the time of the draft and Magic fans don't seem to hot on it either. That should tell you all you need to know about "fair" value.

Since when are these trade scenarios based on Magic fans interest in a offer. Fans aren’t interested unless some kind of huge overpay for “their guy.” Then the non fan of that team doesn’t like the scenario because it is a scenario not based in reality.

If you think this scenario is a direction the Magic aren’t looking to go — cool state why in a response. Have a take on value (assuming they might consider such a direction) and even chime in on what their actual GM might think (in your opinion).

I just don’t see the reasoning to click on a thread for your team, be flabbergasted with a scenario unless it is not a overpay that would get you to sign on. Any trade scenario here that is worth discussion is going to walk a fine line of value and direction for any organization — more so when a non 12th man scenario is broached.

Added: perfect example of this is your ROSS for Mills + Murray suggestion. If that was my OP and when you clicked on thread, got you to say as Magic fan, “Yes, let’s do this trade scenario,” that is not based in value reality (Spurs fans should be insulted).


Confusing to say the least. I'm not a Magic fan. Warriors fan here. Hi!

AG is worth more than Culver and a protected 1st from the Spurs. You claiming that its good value has no basis in reality. As posted by others - Gordon was a top 10 pick also, but he has actually played well, and lead a team to the playoffs. Culver has... done well in a draft combine? And he isn't even some generational player or highly touted player in a loaded draft. He's a mid lotto pick in a draft widely considered flat after the first few picks. This is not even remotely close at this point in value or need.

And i'm not really concerned with Ross for Murray and Mills. The only point of that was that Ross would actually be obtainable in the scenario in this thread (Magic trying to get younger) and Murray is something the Magic may actually be interested in. Culver and some pick in the future is not (not for AG at least)... at least not at this point. I have no clue how the Spurs value Mills or even Murray. I like Murray a lot - but he is coming off a major injury and he is in a contract year. At any rate, I'm not insulted that people don't like that idea. It was just an alternate thought to the usual RoCo trade talk. The Twolves seem to like him a lot and that's great for them. Culver for Murray is another thought.

Additionally, I think you (could have been someone else) mentioned that Ross has negative value? How so? He's a solid 6th man defending wing making solid 6th man money. Shoot, i'd love him for my team, but we're hard capped.
LF75 wrote: It was a dumb idea..And yes I'm a dick.

Return to Trades and Transactions