Trade Talk (Part Four)

Post #1401 » by **Klomp** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 12:20 pm

Simple trade idea: No. 17 to OKC for Terrance Ferguson?

Rookie-Mistake · Post #1402 » by **Rookie-Mistake** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 12:34 pm

I don't know much about Terrance.. haven't watched much of him.. what's the thought process?

Klomp wrote:Simple trade idea: No. 17 to OKC for Terrance Ferguson?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using RealGM mobile app

Merc_Porto · Post #1403 » by **Merc_Porto** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 12:37 pm

Klomp wrote:Simple trade idea: No. 17 to OKC for Terrance Ferguson?

What a waste of pick that would be.

Post #1404 » by **Klomp** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 12:48 pm

Rookie-Mistake wrote:I don't know much about Terrance.. haven't watched much of him.. what's the thought process?
Klomp wrote:Simple trade idea: No. 17 to OKC for Terrance Ferguson?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using RealGM mobile app

Most people will probably only look at the scoring average and shooting percentages and dismiss the idea right away, but I'm looking deeper.

1. Very good defender
2. 22 years old
3. Plus athletic profile
4. 70% of his career FGAs are 3-pointers
5. Two-year starter for playoff team
6. May be losing spot in lineup, so could come cheaper
7. OKC is changing coaches, may not be tied to him
8. Last year of rookie deal, could give trade discount if they don't plan to re-sign

Initially, giving up the 17 may seem like too much. However, I like the idea of adding someone who's already been a contributor at the NBA level but is still young enough to grow with the team.

minimus · Post #1405 » by **minimus** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:01 pm

Klomp wrote:
Rookie-Mistake wrote:I don't know much about Terrance.. haven't watched much of him.. what's the thought process?
Klomp wrote:Simple trade idea: No. 17 to OKC for Terrance Ferguson?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using RealGM mobile app

Most people will probably only look at the scoring average and shooting percentages and dismiss the idea right away, but I'm looking deeper.

1. Very good defender
2. 22 years old
3. Plus athletic profile
4. 70% of his career FGAs are 3-pointers
5. Two-year starter for playoff team
6. May be losing spot in lineup, so could come cheaper
7. OKC is changing coaches, may not be tied to him
8. Last year of rookie deal, could give trade discount if they don't plan to re-sign

Initially, giving up the 17 may seem like too much. However, I like the idea of adding someone who's already been a contributor at the NBA level but is still young enough to grow with the team.

Sorry, but I'd rather draft Tyler Bey or Xavier Tillman at 17

Post #1406 » by **Klomp** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:04 pm

Fun fact: Bey is older than Ferguson

minimus · Post #1407 » by **minimus** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:06 pm

Klomp wrote:Fun fact: Bey is older than Ferguson

Hmmm... Indeed.

shrink · Post #1408 » by **shrink** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:39 pm

KGdaBom wrote:I'd rather do #1 for #5 and Nance. Hunter had a disappointing rookie year. Nance would meet our needs much better.

I haven’t seen anyone talking about this. Nance seems like a CLE guy, especially since his dad is fondly remembered for his seven season as a Cav. We might have to overpay. I don’t have strong feelings on Nance jr, one way or another, so I can’t comment on the values.

One thing that this post reminded me of is an economic/psychological phenomena that might make it harder to get full value out of the #1 pick. The easiest way to describe it is “sour grapes.” Fans/front offices may have had specific players at the top of draft until the lottery happened, and they didn’t win the number one pick. As they started looking at more prospects around their pick (here, #5), they start to fall in love with the players there as they envision the kid wearing that Cavs jersey reaching their highest ceiling. I often see this manifest on the Trade Board, where a poster with the #5 pick (or whatever), is more likely to see a tier that stretches higher than it should, and ends just after his pick. For example, a Cavs fan may say, “I think the top 5 picks all have the same value, so I wouldn’t give anything to trade up.” Obviously this is false - even if all the players were in the first tier, getting to choose your favorite of the five has value, but people tend to rationalize that value away.

Right now (and this could certainly change once we see pre-draft workouts), I feel there is a definite top three tier. I feel Ball, Wiseman and Edwards have a significantly better chance of becoming a star than anyone else in the draft. This doesn’t mean becoming a star is likely for any of them, but stars are what have real value to NBA franchises - not role players.

KGdaBom · Post #1409 » by **KGdaBom** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:28 pm

shrink wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:I'd rather do #1 for #5 and Nance. Hunter had a disappointing rookie year. Nance would meet our needs much better.

I haven’t seen anyone talking about this. Nance seems like a CLE guy, especially since his dad is fondly remembered for his seven season as a Cav. We might have to overpay. I don’t have strong feelings on Nance jr, one way or another, so I can’t comment on the values.

One thing that this post reminded me of is an economic/psychological phenomena that might make it harder to get full value out of the #1 pick. The easiest way to describe it is “sour grapes.” Fans/front offices may have had specific players at the top of draft until the lottery happened, and they didn’t win the number one pick. As they started looking at more prospects around their pick (here, #5), they start to fall in love with the players there as they envision the kid wearing that Cavs jersey reaching their highest ceiling. I often see this manifest on the Trade Board, where a poster with the #5 pick (or whatever), is more likely to see a tier that stretches higher than it should, and ends just after his pick. For example, a Cavs fan may say, “I think the top 5 picks all have the same value, so I wouldn’t give anything to trade up.” Obviously this is false - even if all the players were in the first tier, getting to choose your favorite of the five has value, but people tend to rationalize that value away.

Right now (and this could certainly change once we see pre-draft workouts), I feel there is a definite top three tier. I feel Ball, Wiseman and Edwards have a significantly better chance of becoming a star than anyone else in the draft. This doesn’t mean becoming a star is likely for any of them, but stars are what have real value to NBA franchises - not role players.

Look at Nance's #s. https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nancela02.html
He'd be the almost perfect PF for us. Nance does everything well. We use #5 to get the SF we need possibly Vassell and we are a solid team.

NebWolvesFan · Post #1410 » by **NebWolvesFan** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 3:08 pm

I'm not sure this has been brought up, but what about No. 1 for No. 3 and Graham. If the Hornets are serious about Ball as some mocks have pointed out, then Graham may be expendable. He also a RFA after this year and could get paid. Graham would be a great "Eric Gordon" type off the bench or could start when Russell is out. Plus, with the Warriors likely to take Wiseman or Deni at 2, Minnesota could still get Edwards at 3. I feel Graham could be easier to pry away than PJ.

minimus · Post #1411 » by **minimus** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 3:53 pm

Read on Twitter

Would you trade #1 pick, JJ, Culver and Beasley in separate S&T for PG13?

Baseline81 · Post #1412 » by **Baseline81** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:50 pm

minimus wrote:

Read on Twitter

Would you trade #1 pick, JJ, Culver and Beasley in separate S&T for PG13?

No, but then again, I'm interested in seeing what Beasley can do alongside Russell and Towns. Plus, did you see George in these playoffs?

jayu70 · Post #1413 » by **jayu70** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:54 pm

KGdaBom wrote:
minimus wrote:

My favorite scenario by far.

We get the 6th pick. Is that them getting Edwards? So we're giving the #1 pick?

Rumor is Minny offered....Hawks said No!

NebWolvesFan · Post #1414 » by **NebWolvesFan** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:55 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
minimus wrote:

Read on Twitter

Would you trade #1 pick, JJ, Culver and Beasley in separate S&T for PG13?

No, but then again, I'm interested in seeing what Beasley can do alongside Russell and Towns. Plus, did you see George in these playoffs?

Beasley is a dog and I have long liked him, but he's getting miles on him. Plus he's at that point in his career where he's going to chase rings.

What about a sign-and-trade deal where we send Hernangomez to the Bulls for Kris Dunn. Both will probably be around the MLE in FA and the new Bulls GM came from Denver. Dunn's defensive highlights are insane.

Post #1415 » by **Klomp** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:57 pm

NebWolvesFan wrote:Beasley is a dog and I have long liked him, but he's getting miles on him. Plus he's at that point in his career where he's going to chase rings.

Are you confusing 23-year old Malik Beasley with 33-year old James Johnson?

Baseline81 · Post #1416 » by **Baseline81** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 5:02 pm

NebWolvesFan wrote:Beasley is a dog and I have long liked him, but he's getting miles on him. Plus he's at that point in his career where he's going to chase rings.

What about a sign-and-trade deal where we send Hernangomez to the Bulls for Kris Dunn. Both will probably be around the MLE in FA and the new Bulls GM came from Denver. Dunn's defensive highlights are insane.

Which Beasley are you referring to? I am talking about the 23-year old, Malik Beasley -- the one Rosas traded for at the deadline from Denver.

TheProdigy · Post #1417 » by **TheProdigy** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 5:12 pm

minimus wrote:

Read on Twitter

Would you trade #1 pick, JJ, Culver and Beasley in separate S&T for PG13?

Edit: My original post was a little harsh. Instead I'll just say that the Arye Abraham guy has claimed to have inside knowledge in the past which turned out to be false.

minimus · Post #1418 » by **minimus** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 5:13 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
minimus wrote:

Read on Twitter

Would you trade #1 pick, JJ, Culver and Beasley in separate S&T for PG13?

did you see George in these playoffs?

I saw playoff P. If the price for him is the lowest, we should try to get him now. I also think that:

* - Doc Rivers is an overrated coach
* - LAC chemistry was awful

There is a big chance that PG13 would play better in MIN

Baseline81 · Post #1419 » by **Baseline81** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 5:33 pm

minimus wrote:I saw playoff P. If the price for him is the lowest, we should try to get him now. I also think that:

* - Doc Rivers is an overrated coach
* - LAC chemistry was awful

There is a big chance that PG13 would play better in MIN

He may play better here in Minny, but...

With George already 30 years of age, I'm not sure paying $35M for possibly one year is the sort of move Rosas should be doing. George's last year of his contract is a player option at $38M.

Will he be the number one option? If not, how can you justify his cost?

minimus · Post #1420 » by **minimus** » Thu Sep 17, 2020 5:35 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
minimus wrote:I saw playoff P. If the price for him is the lowest, we should try to get him now. I also think that:

* - Doc Rivers is an overrated coach
* - LAC chemistry was awful

There is a big chance that PG13 would play better in MIN

He may play better here in Minny, but...

With George already 30 years of age, I'm not sure paying $35M for possibly one year is the sort of move Rosas should be doing. George's last year of his contract is a player option at $38M.

Will he be the number one option? If not, how can you justify his cost?

That's valid question. It's not like am looking for shortcuts, but PG13 is a big wing we need on perimeter to balance out offense and defense. In terms of skills he is a perf skills. Age and contract are big risks though.