Beenie wrote:ZoStrong wrote:Beenie wrote:
99% of every transactional idea discussed isn’t happening so being reticent on what the vision of team should be would apply across the board if that was indeed the standard.
Yes, but most of those imaginary transactions involve players who are likely to move or or possibly available. You think Celtics fans are debating about Tatum trades? We can talk about Jimmy trades, but Bam not happening as time soon
Example doesn’t work because Bam is no way Tatem’s equivalent.
Every GM would build a team around Tatem. The same is not true of Bam.
In a post Jimmy era, unless someone else develops or the team acquires a star, Bam would get recasted from a #2ish/ #3 to the role of “the man.”
I’d like to explore the idea of which reality is better: Bam as the 1A franchise player or trading him for a trove of picks
I’ll never forget you wanted to replace him with Claxton and I think you were saying Yurt made Bam expendable and wanted to trade him after Yurt had a good stretch
