Would you have dealt Flynn for NOH 1st (top 7 protected)?

shrink · Post #1 » by **shrink** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 2:02 am

That's what the Hornets were willing to pay for Bayless, and I think they are going to be a lotto team for several years to come.

Would you have given Flynn for that pick?

Post #2 » by **Klomp** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 2:27 am

shrink wrote:That's what the Hornets were willing to pay for Bayless, and I think they are going to be a lotto team for several years to come.

Would you have given Flynn for that pick?

Since Flynn>>>Bayless, no I wouldn't

And I had a feeling some sort of thread would be made here after seeing the announcement.

Esohny · Post #3 » by **Esohny** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:20 am

No, although I would have traded Flynn for the Pacer's (and gotten Paul George) in concert with other moves.

The Hornets aren't going to contend, but until Paul leaves, I don't think they're going to decline as much as other many people seem to think.

fattymcgee · Post #4 » by **fattymcgee** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:30 am

shrink wrote:That's what the Hornets were willing to pay for Bayless, and I think they are going to be a lotto team for several years to come.

Would you have given Flynn for that pick?

That pick won't be higher than #8 so I would say definitely not.

Tirion · Post #5 » by **Tirion** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 4:11 am

I would, NOH wouldn't though.

Post #6 » by **Klomp** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 4:28 am

Tirion wrote:I would, NOH wouldn't though.

So you're saying Bayless>Flynn?

:lol:

Tirion · Post #7 » by **Tirion** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 4:45 am

No, I'm saying that he has higher trade value.

shangrila · Post #8 » by **shangrila** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 6:32 am

shrink wrote:That's what the Hornets were willing to pay for Bayless, and I think they are going to be a lotto team for several years to come.

Would you have given Flynn for that pick?

No because there's far too many factors. What if New Orleans makes the playoffs? What if the draft is weak?

Besides, how many picks would we honestly need. We'll have ours, and although I'll dream of Barnes it should (hopefully) not be a top 5 pick, I can see Memphis making the playoffs so we'd probably have theirs and we'll definitely get Utah's. We're going to struggle to accomodate everything as it is.

Foye · Post #9 » by **Foye** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 7:27 pm

Tirion wrote:No, I'm saying that he has higher trade value.

Why?

wilt · Post #10 » by **wilt** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 8:30 pm

IMO the only reason to trade a young player is to a) get a veteran that´s just a lot better or to b) get sth out of a guy you wouldn´t play (due to better players ahead of him when in win-now-mode)

Well, admittedly Portland didn´t aply theese "rules" (seriously, their 2 PG backups have a combined 38 regular season minutes courtesy of Patty Mills) but that doesn´t mean a team that´s still likely in the lottery next year (come on, it´s the west) should trade a young player for a draft pick. That would likely be a lateral move at best imo ...

While i don´t think Flynn is a great fit for the current offense, he can at least shoot the ball and Ridnour imo is showing that a small, quick PG can do good thing if he just knows to pick his spots. I still like Flyn´s ability to get early offense and create off the drible, in todays NBA those are important traits ...

LordBaldric · Post #11 » by **LordBaldric** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 8:48 pm

Yes. A low 2012 lottery pick could be great. When the lockout comes next summer and all the top talent decides to stay in college, the next draft after that is going to be a monster.

shangrila · Post #12 » by **shangrila** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 9:29 pm

LordBaldric wrote:Yes. A low 2012 lottery pick could be great. When the lockout comes next summer and all the top talent decides to stay in college, the next draft after that is going to be a monster.

Shrink is talking about a 2011, not a 2012 pick

Post #13 » by **C.lupus** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 9:47 pm

shangrila wrote:
LordBaldric wrote:Yes. A low 2012 lottery pick could be great. When the lockout comes next summer and all the top talent decides to stay in college, the next draft after that is going to be a monster.

Shrink is talking about a 2011, not a 2012 pick

Which is a major reason why I say no. Too early to give up on Flynn and the 2011 draft class is likely going to be very slim.

LordBaldric · Post #14 » by **LordBaldric** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 9:48 pm

shangrila wrote:
LordBaldric wrote:Yes. A low 2012 lottery pick could be great. When the lockout comes next summer and all the top talent decides to stay in college, the next draft after that is going to be a monster.

Shrink is talking about a 2011, not a 2012 pick

Hmm. If there is a 2011 draft it's probably going to suck. God I hope we give up our pick to the Clippers this year.

moss_is_1 · Post #15 » by **moss_is_1** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 10:03 pm

^Seems that it's mostly littered with big men, and we obviously don't need that, but I wouldn't say it looks like its going to suck. Barnes, Vessley, Jones all look like they could be studs.

Post #16 » by **C.lupus** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 10:12 pm

moss_is_1 wrote:^Seems that it's mostly littered with big men, and we obviously don't need that, but I wouldn't say it looks like its going to suck. Barnes, Vessley, Jones all look like they could be studs.

If they come out. The assumption is that with a lockout, most of those guys would just go back to school or play in Europe another year. There are only two seniors in Draftexpress' first round mock.

Post #17 » by **Worm Guts** » Sun Oct 24, 2010 10:20 pm

It would suck because players won't declare because of lockout, which would mean some of the players you listed might not be involved.

I would only make this trade if I had given up on Jonny or I was convinced Rubio will be a star. I'm not quite there on either.

Krapinsky · Post #18 » by **Krapinsky** » Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:25 pm

I would not. Flynn is going to be good. He's also the only point guard we have with any experience running our offense. Our young team does not need another middle of the round draft pick -- that pick is likely somewhere between 12-18. It's a Luke Babbit/Larry Sanders level of a prospect.

Dewey · Post #19 » by **Dewey** » Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:58 pm

IMO, we are not in position to trade Flynn until Rubio is in uniform. I'm not a big Flynn guy, but he does have potential and is a good character guy for now.

younggunsmn · Post #20 » by **younggunsmn** » Mon Oct 25, 2010 6:43 pm

Nice deal for Portland, I dunno about New Orleans. they also traded a 2nd for jerrels and then cut him, and this pick could bite them in the ass big time down the road. Plus Bayless expires at the same time as Paul. A likely lottery pick for a backup combo guard is not something most teams would do.

Right now most of us wouldn't do this, but when Rubio signs on the dotted line we will probably wish we had.
Always in motion the future is.
I really like what Ridnour has shown so far and am much more up on the idea of him as a rubio mentor and long term backup PG than when we signed him.

You mention babbit and sanders, but that pick could also be ty lawson or darren collison or even brook lopez.