Trade Talk (Part 16): Early Season Anxiety Edition

[winforlose]

You know what a team with offensive struggles needs desperately in a PG, more offensive struggles. I put a link to Lonzo’s BB ref page below, he is so far from the answer. We need a Coby White type sharpshooter PG (what we thought we were getting with DDV and hope to develop Dilly into.) At this point Mike is semi washed and not super helpful. You win or lose at the PG and C and our rotations are deficient in both.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/balllo01/gamelog/2025/

I think I disagree with every part of this...

Lonzo's shot hasn't come around yet, but he's fueling winning. He's the ideal guy to put next to Ant. We don't need another small SG that can't defend next to him.

I also do not believe "You win or lose at the PG and C". I think you win with wings. Give me three 2-way players at SG/SF/PF and I can fill in the gaps easily. Other than Jokic (who is an anomaly), what's the last title team to win because of their Center? Tim Duncan's Spurs?

Also, what were the names of the PG and C who fueled the wins for the Celtics last year?

Interesting that you point to the Celtics who upgraded their PG and C won a title. Granted KP was hurt a ton (including the playoffs.) To your other point, putting aside the Shaq dynasty, Green functioned as the C for the 2021 Warriors. It’s not always about start power. It is about keeping the offense running efficiently, the rebounding and rim protection at functional levels, effective screen game, ect… Show me a dynasty with a bad PG?

Small ball is your logical counter argument to the importance of C. But in order for small ball to work you need gang rebounding, excellent spacing and shooting, and dynamic offense. Outside of the Steph Warriors how many small ball teams have thrived?

P.S go back one year and you have Jokic and Murray.

[BlacJacMac]

Show me a dynasty with a bad PG?

The Bulls and The Lakers.

[BlacJacMac]

I think I disagree with every part of this...

Lonzo's shot hasn't come around yet, but he's fueling winning. He's the ideal guy to put next to Ant. We don't need another small SG that can't defend next to him.

I also do not believe "You win or lose at the PG and C". I think you win with wings. Give me three 2-way players at SG/SF/PF and I can fill in the gaps easily. Other than Jokic (who is an anomaly), what's the last title team to win because of their Center? Tim Duncan's Spurs?

Also, what were the names of the PG and C who fueled the wins for the Celtics last year?

Interesting that you point to the Celtics who upgraded their PG and C won a title. Granted KP was hurt a ton (including the playoffs.) To your other point, putting aside the Shaq dynasty, Green functioned as the C for the 2021 Warriors. It’s not always about start power. It is about keeping the offense running efficiently, the rebounding and rim protection at functional levels, effective screen game, ect… Show me a dynasty with a bad PG?

Small ball is your logical counter argument to the importance of C. But in order for small ball to work you need gang rebounding, excellent spacing and shooting, and dynamic offense. Outside of the Steph Warriors how many small ball teams have thrived?

P.S go back one year and you have Jokic and Murray.

If you want to say the Celtics made it over the top because they added a PG and C, then you have to say the inverse for Denver.

The Jokic/Murray combo never came close to sniffing a title until they added guys like Gordon, Brown and KCP - 2-way wings/swing forwards.

[winforlose]

Show me a dynasty with a bad PG?

The Bulls and The Lakers.

I didn’t watch the Bulls during the Jordan era (I was too young and not that into basketball,) and I don’t remember a ton from the Kobe era of the Lakers, but my understanding of both is that the high usage on ball guards were Jordan and Bryant. They initiated the offense most of the time no?

[BlacJacMac]

Show me a dynasty with a bad PG?

The Bulls and The Lakers.

I didn’t watch the Bulls during the Jordan era (I was too young and not that into basketball,) and I don’t remember a ton from the Kobe era of the Lakers, but my understanding of both is that the high usage on ball guards were Jordan and Bryant. They initiated the offense most of the time no?

But both still played next to PGs.

[winforlose]

Also, what were the names of the PG and C who fueled the wins for the Celtics last year?

Interesting that you point to the Celtics who upgraded their PG and C won a title. Granted KP was hurt a ton (including the playoffs.) To your other point, putting aside the Shaq dynasty, Green functioned as the C for the 2021 Warriors. It’s not always about start power. It is about keeping the offense running efficiently, the rebounding and rim protection at functional levels, effective screen game, ect… Show me a dynasty with a bad PG?

Small ball is your logical counter argument to the importance of C. But in order for small ball to work you need gang rebounding, excellent spacing and shooting, and dynamic offense. Outside of the Steph Warriors how many small ball teams have thrived?

P.S go back one year and you have Jokic and Murray.

If you want to say the Celtics made it over the top because they added a PG and C, then you have to say the inverse for Denver.

The Jokic/Murray combo never came close to sniffing a title until they added guys like Gordon, Brown and KCP - 2-way wings/swing forwards.

Fair. I didn’t say you only need a PG and C, I said they are the most important positions. Again, the reason relates to the function. The PG runs the offense, keeps the ball moving, keeps guys organized, and hopefully avoids turnovers in the process. The C is the rim protector, rebounder, screener, who helps dominate inside. If a SG initiates more than half the time they are the defacto PG. Just like how Mike isn’t playing PG when standing in the corner waiting for the pass from Ant or Randle.

[Note30]

Even if it was legal the trade is terrible anyway, so I guess the technicalities are a bit moot.

I mean I would definitely want to know why you think that. This actually gives us a shot at contention.

[Klomp]

Interesting that you point to the Celtics who upgraded their PG and C won a title. Granted KP was hurt a ton (including the playoffs.) To your other point, putting aside the Shaq dynasty, Green functioned as the C for the 2021 Warriors. It’s not always about start power. It is about keeping the offense running efficiently, the rebounding and rim protection at functional levels, effective screen game, ect… Show me a dynasty with a bad PG?

Small ball is your logical counter argument to the importance of C. But in order for small ball to work you need gang rebounding, excellent spacing and shooting, and dynamic offense. Outside of the Steph Warriors how many small ball teams have thrived?

P.S go back one year and you have Jokic and Murray.

If you want to say the Celtics made it over the top because they added a PG and C, then you have to say the inverse for Denver.

The Jokic/Murray combo never came close to sniffing a title until they added guys like Gordon, Brown and KCP - 2-way wings/swing forwards.

Fair. I didn’t say you only need a PG and C, I said they are the most important positions. Again, the reason relates to the function. The PG runs the offense, keeps the ball moving, keeps guys organized, and hopefully avoids turnovers in the process. The C is the rim protector, rebounder, screener, who helps dominate inside. If a SG initiates more than half the time they are the defacto PG. Just like how Mike isn’t playing PG when standing in the corner waiting for the pass from Ant or Randle.

The only negative point guard change that was made from last year to this year was losing Jordan McLaughlin and Monte Morris in free agency. Considering the importance you place on the position do you consider them the lynchpin of the team's downfall and destruction this season?

[winforlose]

If you want to say the Celtics made it over the top because they added a PG and C, then you have to say the inverse for Denver.

The Jokic/Murray combo never came close to sniffing a title until they added guys like Gordon, Brown and KCP - 2-way wings/swing forwards.

Fair. I didn’t say you only need a PG and C, I said they are the most important positions. Again, the reason relates to the function. The PG runs the offense, keeps the ball moving, keeps guys organized, and hopefully avoids turnovers in the process. The C is the rim protector, rebounder, screener, who helps dominate inside. If a SG initiates more than half the time they are the defacto PG. Just like how Mike isn’t playing PG when standing in the corner waiting for the pass from Ant or Randle.

The only negative point guard change that was made from last year to this year was losing Jordan McLaughlin and Monte Morris in free agency. Considering the importance you place on the position do you consider them the lynchpin of the team's downfall and destruction this season?

I hope this is a joke. Like honestly and sincerely I do. Mike Conley has fallen off a cliff. Like this Mike and last years Mike are not the same player. They may have the same name and face, but that is about all they share. As for backup C I wonder who we lost there?

P.S look at good Rudy games and bad Rudy games for the importance of Rudy and a C.

[shangrila]

Even if it was legal the trade is terrible anyway, so I guess the technicalities are a bit moot.

I mean I would definitely want to know why you think that. This actually gives us a shot at contention.

Your trade hinges on Kawhi Leonard, who has a degenerative condition in his knee that is already preventing him from playing half a season let alone playoffs, and Dejounte Murray, who has had exactly 1 season in his entire career as an above average player.

This "shot" at contention you mention is the equivalent of betting your entire life savings on a roulette roll; technically possible to make you a winner but so statistically unlikely that only a fool would make that bet.

[BlacJacMac]

Fair. I didn’t say you only need a PG and C, I said they are the most important positions. Again, the reason relates to the function. The PG runs the offense, keeps the ball moving, keeps guys organized, and hopefully avoids turnovers in the process. The C is the rim protector, rebounder, screener, who helps dominate inside. If a SG initiates more than half the time they are the defacto PG. Just like how Mike isn’t playing PG when standing in the corner waiting for the pass from Ant or Randle.

The only negative point guard change that was made from last year to this year was losing Jordan McLaughlin and Monte Morris in free agency. Considering the importance you place on the position do you consider them the lynchpin of the team's downfall and destruction this season?

I hope this is a joke. Like honestly and sincerely I do. Mike Conley has fallen off a cliff. Like this Mike and last years Mike are not the same player. They may have the same name and face, but that is about all they share. As for backup C I wonder who we lost there?

P.S look at good Rudy games and bad Rudy games for the importance of Rudy and a C.

So are you actually saying PG and C are the most important positions for our team, not in general?

[winforlose]

The only negative point guard change that was made from last year to this year was losing Jordan McLaughlin and Monte Morris in free agency. Considering the importance you place on the position do you consider them the lynchpin of the team's downfall and destruction this season?

I hope this is a joke. Like honestly and sincerely I do. Mike Conley has fallen off a cliff. Like this Mike and last years Mike are not the same player. They may have the same name and face, but that is about all they share. As for backup C I wonder who we lost there?

P.S look at good Rudy games and bad Rudy games for the importance of Rudy and a C.

So are you actually saying PG and C are the most important positions for our team, not in general?

For the reasons stated above PG and C are the most important for any team. When you fail at those positions everything gets significantly harder. Look at the Suns last year. They had 3 excellent scorers, plus a lot of additional shooting and scoring. But they were weak at the PG so they struggled to tie everyone together, and they were weak at the C so they couldn’t control the paint. For every example you give of a team that made it work with a weakness at one of the two positions, there are more examples of teams failing without those positions properly secured. Also, I am not saying they need to be all stars or the best players on the team, I am saying they need to be properly represented for 48 minutes.

[BlacJacMac]

Hard disagree.

Did the Suns need a PG? Yes.

Is the PG their most important player? Not even remotely.

[winforlose]

Hard disagree.

Did the Suns need a PG? Yes.

Is the PG their most important player? Not even remotely.

If you don’t have functional PG and C positions you are not winning anything. It really is that simple.

[BlacJacMac]

Could it increase his potential trade value, since any team that acquires him also gets his Bird rights?

Are we 100% sure we have them? I still haven't seen anything definitive saying we have his Full Bird and not his Early Bird.

I still think it seems wrong that we would've renounced his Bird Rights when we resigned him, bit that's been reported multiple places.

He was literally signed using Bird rights in 2023. That comes from Keith Smith at Spotrac. Those don't just disappear.

I think there needs to be an education seminar on which sources to believe when it comes to the salary cap and who is just guessing.

Was he? I thought we signed him with part of our MLE because he signed for less than the QO. So if we didn't extend the QO, we lost his Bird Rights to save 2M. That would make him an Early Bird candidate this offseason.

[BlacJacMac]

Hard disagree.

Did the Suns need a PG? Yes.

Is the PG their most important player? Not even remotely.

If you don’t have functional PG and C positions you are not winning anything. It really is that simple.

So now you've moved the goalposts all the way from "most important" to "functional"?

I don't even know how to respond to that...

[Klomp]

Are we 100% sure we have them? I still haven't seen anything definitive saying we have his Full Bird and not his Early Bird.

I still think it seems wrong that we would've renounced his Bird Rights when we resigned him, bit that's been reported multiple places.

He was literally signed using Bird rights in 2023. That comes from Keith Smith at Spotrac. Those don't just disappear.

I think there needs to be an education seminar on which sources to believe when it comes to the salary cap and who is just guessing.

Was he? I thought we signed him with part of our MLE because he signed for less than the QO. So if we didn't extend the QO, we lost his Bird Rights to save 2M. That would make him an Early Bird candidate this offseason.

Where I think the confusion is coming in here is the clarification between "deciding to not extend a qualifying offer" and "renouncing his Bird rights".

Minnesota did not extend a qualifying offer, but I am fairly confident that they still had and have his Bird rights.

[winforlose]

Hard disagree.

Did the Suns need a PG? Yes.

Is the PG their most important player? Not even remotely.

If you don’t have functional PG and C positions you are not winning anything. It really is that simple.

So now you've moved the goalposts all the way from "most important" to "functional"?

I don't even know how to respond to that...

Speaking of moving the goal post, here is what I said “ You win or lose at the PG and C and our rotations are deficient in both.”

Edit to add: one more quote from myself from above to prevent further misquotes “ For the reasons stated above PG and C are the most important for any team. When you fail at those positions everything gets significantly harder.”

[wolves_89]

He was literally signed using Bird rights in 2023. That comes from Keith Smith at Spotrac. Those don't just disappear.

I think there needs to be an education seminar on which sources to believe when it comes to the salary cap and who is just guessing.

Was he? I thought we signed him with part of our MLE because he signed for less than the QO. So if we didn't extend the QO, we lost his Bird Rights to save 2M. That would make him an Early Bird candidate this offseason.

Where I think the confusion is coming in here is the clarification between "deciding to not extend a qualifying offer" and "renouncing his Bird rights".

Minnesota did not extend a qualifying offer, but I am fairly confident that they still had and have his Bird rights.

I'm pretty sure Klomp is right. To the best of my understanding, once a team has Bird rights on a player (which the Wolves had when they acquired NAW from the Jazz) they keep those rights until renounced or the player signs with another team in free agency. Bird rights come with a cap hold, which is the main reason teams sometimes renounce a player's Bird rights (so they can free up money below the salary cap to sign a different player). The fact that the Wolves are still holding Bird rights on Evan Turner (see the cap hold that shows up in the Spotrac Wolves page), tells me they haven't renounced Bird rights on anyone in quite a while.

[BlacJacMac]

If you don’t have functional PG and C positions you are not winning anything. It really is that simple.

So now you've moved the goalposts all the way from "most important" to "functional"?

I don't even know how to respond to that...

Speaking of moving the goal post, here is what I said “ You win or lose at the PG and C and our rotations are deficient in both.”

Edit to add: one more quote from myself from above to prevent further misquotes “ For the reasons stated above PG and C are the most important for any team. When you fail at those positions everything gets significantly harder.”

And this direct quote from Post #546:

"I didn’t say you only need a PG and C, I said they are the most important positions."

My goalposts remain firmly planted.