Noel's Trade Value is at its Highest Now

[Arsenal]

Therefore there is PLENTY of money to resign Noel AND do whatever else we want to do. Thanks Sam!

Sure. But the cap defines where you can off FA's contracts. It also affects your ability to make impact trades. I'm very ro-Nerlens in general. But you can't ignore the impact that resigning him to a near max contract will have on the types of players they can add to the team in the next few years. keeping Nerlens does not completely hamstring what they can do, but it will limit their flexibility as teams well under the cap have an advantage over those who are within 10M of the cap.

Once we're a contender, it's unlikely we'll be playing the "get under the cap to sign MAX free agents" game unless there is a crazy cap spike like this season. However, that likely won't happen again.

Any impact free agents need to be signed this summer (2017), or the 2 summers after that. After 2020, that door will be closed.

[LongLiveHinkie]

You can sign Noel and then trade him a year later if you want.

[tk76]

I just think people are looking at this through the wrong lens. It sort of reminds me of AI's rookie year. People knew AI was going to be the man, but they also liked Stackhouse's potential- who had just put up 20.7 PPG at age 22. I think people look at Nerlens and think, "It would be bad to lose this guy, so how can we make this thing work." And that same type of thinking would have kept Stackhouse at SG by keeping AI at PG. Sure that could have worked- but it would not have maximized your best player.

The team needs to think about maximizing Embiid 1st, Simmons 2nd and everything else is secondary.

So if you conclude that Embiid is best served always playing all of his minutes next to a PF who can shoot... then almost by definition NN is not in your long term plans. Likewise, if you decide that in order to maximize Simmons impact, he needs to be defensively guarding the 4... then Noel is the odd man out.

In order to maximize Embiid you need to surround him with shooters. You already are conceding one sub-par shooter in Simmons. Likewise, Simmons will do best with guys who can shoot in order to spread the floor (like Embiid and Saric.) The team will have only 1 or 2 big salary slots to invest around Embiid and Simmons. Does it make the most semse to use one of those slots on Noel?

If you think Embiid is best served playing lower minutes (32 or less) and it is fine playing Simmons heavy minutes at SF and Embiid playing 8-10 minutes next to another center... then you can consider extending Noel and start debating whether it is OK paying him 20M+ a year. But it has to start with Embiid and Simmons and the overall team building strategy. And honestly, given those 2 guys as your future core, I have a tough time thinking Noel is the right fit- despite the fact that I'd love 48 minutes of elite rim protection. Because with the way things are trending, finding a guy who gives you 16 minutes of elite rim protection is something you can do on the cheap.

[spikeslovechild]

The safest move is still to move Noel and redirect his RFA dollars elsewhere.

Let's look at the pro's and cons of resigning Nerlens.

Pro: The cap space is there... for at least the first 3 years of a new contract:

The max for players coming off their rookie deals is going to start at about 24M and go up from there. You have to guess that some team is going to offer him at least 4yr/80-90M. Look at Dallas. They will have Barnes, likely draft a stud PG and have a ton of cap space. Adding a Noel would be a perfect fit to kickstart their rebuild (I looked at the list of possible FA, and Noel really stands out as the player that would fit best with the Mavs should they draft a PG.)

Sure the Sixers can afford to match in the short term, and having Simmons, Saric and their upcoming lottery picks under rookie deals for the next 3-4 years will really help balance the books (thanks Sam!) So for the first 3 years of a Noel deal the only big contracts will be:
Embiid max: 25M
Noel near max: 22M?
?resign of Ersan(2017) or Roco(2018)
Bayless (9M X 2 more years.)
Lots of rookie deals. The new CBA bumps rookie deals a bit, and Simmons, Saric and 2 lottery picks will account for 20-25M

So the space is there, and after you account for Embiid and Noel's extensions and the rookie deals, it leaves the Sixers with about 30M to either go after a star or add pieces... but resigning RoCo or Ersan would eat into this quickly.

so that takes us to the argument against...

The entire cap (100M+) will be gone in 2 years if the team signs Embiid, Noel, Saric, Simmons, the 2 incoming rookies and 2 solid vets for a combined 30M (be it RoCo + Ersan or some equivalent.) Or, if you want a star, it will cost you most of the 30M, and you will be left with minimum guys and rookies to try and plug holes.

To put it another way, in 2 years about 75M will go to 6 players: Embiid, Simmons, Nerlens, Saric and this summer's lottery picks.
That leaves about 30M to build a contending roster that at best has 2 natural G/SF. That can work if the team plays the numbers right and blows through the cap into the tax... which good teams often do. But the task is much easier if the team spends a fraction of the money that is slated for Noel and uses it on a 15 minute a night fringe player (or goes to Death lineups with Simmons or Saric at C.)

There is a clear glut of C talent that likely will get worse over the next 3 years. It should be comparatively easy to find a defensive specialist on a rookie deal or sign a vet on the cheap. The big money going to mediocre C's like Mozgov was a fluke, that won't be happening in 2 years. And without Nerlens, the team cold very well be in the position to add 2 stars or a star plus a top role player.

Nerlens will be superior to whatever reserve C the Sixers pick up on the cheap. But the question is, with Embiid, Simmons and Saric (and Holmes) on the roster, exactly how much do you need from your reserve C and would that 20M+ make a better impact spent on a perimeter player?

That isn't even a question. It's why I advocated repeatedly if we were going to overpay go and at least overpay for someone who will be playing 30 minutes a game at a position of need. Beal was one of the guys I suggested last offseason. Fournier is another. If we are going to overpay there should actually be a need. In Noel case we literally are overflowing with inhouse CHEAP PF options. So not only are we overpaying but likely we will be giving him minutes of someone who is UNDERPAID.

[eskimo]

Here's an open question to the board about Noel and our desire for improved perimeter options.

What do you think is a more viable option to improving our perimeter options in the next 2 years:

1. Let Noel walk and sign a vet in FA. If so which vet do you think we could attract who could move the needle for us?

2. Let Noel walk and don't sign anyone. Continue internal development of our perimeter prospects and eye a better FA coming here in 2018 offseason.

3. Sign Noel and keep him. The perimeter will be fine with Simmons, internal development (Nik, Furkan, TLC), reversion of Roco's shooting and our upcoming lotto picks this year.

4. Sign Noel and keep him for now. If his game doesn't improve to the point where he can play well with Embiid and the insurance he provides is no longer needed, trade him for a perimeter player.

I tend to favor #4 myself as I believe his game will evolve the the point where we both of our big guys on the court for about 15 minutes and we'll want to rest Embiid about 15 minutes. Noel will be great for maintaining our defensive identity when Embiid rests and I think he's going to a great rim runner for Simmons and will develop more ability to drive and shoot as he ages.

Now another big part of this line of thinking is that I think FA will be really, really dry the next few years. I just don't think there's going to be much young talent available for us to pick up. If we want someone under 26 I think we have to trade for them which means having players/assets to facilitate trades.

I just don't see #1 as viable and #2 is praying for good luck.

[Slizeezyc]

I just think people are looking at this through the wrong lens. It sort of reminds me of AI's rookie year. People knew AI was going to be the man, but they also liked Stackhouse's potential- who had just put up 20.7 PPG at age 22. I think people look at Nerlens and think, "It would be bad to lose this guy, so how can we make this thing work." And that same type of thinking would have kept Stackhouse at SG by keeping AI at PG. Sure that could have worked- but it would not have maximized your best player.

The team needs to think about maximizing Embiid 1st, Simmons 2nd and everything else is secondary.

So if you conclude that Embiid is best served always playing all of his minutes next to a PF who can shoot... then almost by definition NN is not in your long term plans. Likewise, if you decide that in order to maximize Simmons impact, he needs to be defensively guarding the 4... then Noel is the odd man out.

In order to maximize Embiid you need to surround him with shooters. You already are conceding one sub-par shooter in Simmons. Likewise, Simmons will do best with guys who can shoot in order to spread the floor (like Embiid and Saric.) The team will have only 1 or 2 big salary slots to invest around Embiid and Simmons. Does it make the most semse to use one of those slots on Noel?

If you think Embiid is best served playing lower minutes (32 or less) and it is fine playing Simmons heavy minutes at SF and Embiid playing 8-10 minutes next to another center... then you can consider extending Noel and start debating whether it is OK paying him 20M+ a year. But it has to start with Embiid and Simmons and the overall team building strategy. And honestly, given those 2 guys as your future core, I have a tough time thinking Noel is the right fit- despite the fact that I'd love 48 minutes of elite rim protection. Because with the way things are trending, finding a guy who gives you 16 minutes of elite rim protection is something you can do on the cheap.

Yep those elite rim protectors def come on the cheap...Oh wait, no they don't. Dedmon is the most decent of the cheap, otherwise I don't really know who you can point to on non-rookie deals who is cheap and good. And the rookies who are cheap are all lottery picks or guys who have new contract extensions waiting to kick in so it's not cheap from that perspective either.

A Noel is almost never cheap in this market, even with the glut of centers around the NBA. I don't disagree with much here in theory beyond that, but that was a real bad way to end an otherwise coherent post. Also it's worth mentioning that we don't know how Simmons/Noel works as a combo either.

I will always agree that Embiid/Noel as a tandem together should never be a thing more than like 5 minutes a half (and Noel/Embiid/Simmons should never really be a thing), but if we believe Embiid (or really any big) should never be counted on for 35+ minutes a night in regular season at this point, then 16-18 minutes as a backup, plus how he plays with Simmons might change a lot about the perspective.

It almost feels like a playoffs issue more than anything else. Noel will retain value barring injury in that he's got an easy skill set to fit on teams. It's why trading him at low value doesn't make much sense in that teams are always going to want a shot-blocking center who runs the floor. The Celtics could use him; the Blazers could use him; the Pelicans could use him; the Wolves could use him etc. He fits with the AD's of the world, and then he just fits as a sole big as well. He's malleable, even if the current market doesn't show it due to his own value being hurt by prior events and free agency status.

[tk76]

It's a tough call however you parse it. Once you sign a player to a big contract you are taking on risk. It could be that he is more valuable as a signed player then an expiring contract- or he might prove to be critical to building a contender. Or his contract could end up being a negative asset due to poor production or injury.

The Sixers have a window of potential contention as long as Embiid is healthy. The four years Noel would be under contract will be some of Embiid's prime years (age 23-27.) We have all been patient in this rebuild- but now the race is on to build a contender and win as much as possible with Embiid. It will be a balancing act between aoiding shortcuts, avoiding bad contracts... and also avoiding having to wait to long for players to develop. So the Noel decision, and what to do with the lottery picks that are coming will be full of big time decisions for BC.

I remember in a BC interview him saying the main lesson he learned from Tor was he should not have assumed Bosh was the superstar he could build a contender around. That seemed like a harsh statement when I heard it- but I hope he realizes that the reverse is now true- and that Embiid is that star. Everything needs to be viewed through that lens.

[tk76]

Yep those elite rim protectors def come on the cheap...Oh wait, no they don't. Dedmon is the most decent of the cheap, otherwise I don't really know who you can point to on non-rookie deals who is cheap and good. And the rookies who are cheap are all lottery picks or guys who have new contract extensions waiting to kick in so it's not cheap from that perspective either.

A Noel is almost never cheap in this market, even with the glut of centers around the NBA. I don't disagree with much here in theory beyond that, but that was a real bad way to end an otherwise coherent post. Also it's worth mentioning that we don't know how Simmons/Noel works as a combo either.

I will always agree that Embiid/Noel as a tandem together should never be a thing more than like 5 minutes a half (and Noel/Embiid/Simmons should never really be a thing), but if we believe Embiid (or really any big) should never be counted on for 35+ minutes a night in regular season at this point, then 16-18 minutes as a backup, plus how he plays with Simmons might change a lot about the perspective.

It almost feels like a playoffs issue more than anything else. Noel will retain value barring injury in that he's got an easy skill set to fit on teams. It's why trading him at low value doesn't make much sense in that teams are always going to want a shot-blocking center who runs the floor. The Celtics could use him; the Blazers could use him; the Pelicans could use him; the Wolves could use him etc. He fits with the AD's of the world, and then he just fits as a sole big as well. He's malleable, even if the current market doesn't show it due to his own value being hurt by prior events and free agency status.

Good points. Let me clarify my opinions.

I think Noel is very valuable and worth a near max contract. I'm just not sure he is the right guy for the Sixers given assets and needs. I don't think you can reproduce what Nerlens does on the cheap- but I do think there will soon be cheap surplus centers that offer some economy. I think you could re-prioritize and use the money elsewhere. You sacrifice having Noel's freakish defensive skillset for the 16 min he would be playing C (I don't think his PF minutes will be all that valuable) and instead go with a combination of "Death" line-ups with Simmons/Saric/Covington frontcourts plus some minutes given to a cheap back-up center (like Holmes or a vet hit by the center glut that is coming.) Then you use the 20M+ savings to absorb the contract of a scoring perimeter player- someone like Beal but healthier.

I also think Noel might be worth resigning- but you need to be comfortable with using Simmons at SF on defense. I'm not good enough of a scout to know if the team is better served with having Simmons play PF on defense most of the time (due either to limitations or in terms of maximizing his chances to grab and go after rebounds) or whether having him chase SF's is a good idea. If it is, then it is easier to talk myself into Noel on a big contract- if only to guarantee 48 minutes of dominant rim protection.

[Slizeezyc]

Yep those elite rim protectors def come on the cheap...Oh wait, no they don't. Dedmon is the most decent of the cheap, otherwise I don't really know who you can point to on non-rookie deals who is cheap and good. And the rookies who are cheap are all lottery picks or guys who have new contract extensions waiting to kick in so it's not cheap from that perspective either.

A Noel is almost never cheap in this market, even with the glut of centers around the NBA. I don't disagree with much here in theory beyond that, but that was a real bad way to end an otherwise coherent post. Also it's worth mentioning that we don't know how Simmons/Noel works as a combo either.

I will always agree that Embiid/Noel as a tandem together should never be a thing more than like 5 minutes a half (and Noel/Embiid/Simmons should never really be a thing), but if we believe Embiid (or really any big) should never be counted on for 35+ minutes a night in regular season at this point, then 16-18 minutes as a backup, plus how he plays with Simmons might change a lot about the perspective.

It almost feels like a playoffs issue more than anything else. Noel will retain value barring injury in that he's got an easy skill set to fit on teams. It's why trading him at low value doesn't make much sense in that teams are always going to want a shot-blocking center who runs the floor. The Celtics could use him; the Blazers could use him; the Pelicans could use him; the Wolves could use him etc. He fits with the AD's of the world, and then he just fits as a sole big as well. He's malleable, even if the current market doesn't show it due to his own value being hurt by prior events and free agency status.

Good points. Let me clarify my opinions.

I think Noel is very valuable and worth a near max contract. I'm just not sure he is the right guy for the Sixers given assets and needs. I don't think you can reproduce what Nerlens does on the cheap- but I do think there will soon be cheap surplus centers that offer some economy. I think you could re-prioritize and use the money elsewhere. You sacrifice having Noel's freakish defensive skillset for the 16 min he would be playing C (I don't think his PF minutes will be all that valuable) and instead go with a combination of "Death" line-ups with Simmons/Saric/Covington frontcourts plus some minutes given to a cheap back-up center (like Holmes or a vet hit by the center glut that is coming.) Then you use the 20M+ savings to absorb the contract of a scoring perimeter player- someone like Beal but healthier.

Fair enough. A final thing I will say is that I don't think the Bookers and Knights, Wiggins, and Gays etc. of the world have much real-world value on the most elite NBA teams. I look at teams that have been champions in the past X number of years, and really none of them have that sort of player on their team (Kyrie is the closest thing, and he's a PG by definition in terms of defense so that doesn't really even work).

Beyond all the champions having a truly elite player (or at least someone playing elite by that time like the Spurs in various seasons near the end of their dynasty), they don't have those high usage points guys at guard. I honestly think those guys bring the least amount of value and cost the most based on that equation.

It's a separate point, but it's why I don't value a Monk like I would most others in the lottery. A Beal is different in that he is high usage and has a good assist rate for the position. But I think overall the non-PG scorer at guard is the most overvalued and least impactful position due to the usage they suck up and lack of defense or other value they provide. Even a Kyrie without LeBron is pushing it in terms of elite value, and he's even a point guard by definition. And even if you're saying "well, the Sixers need a scorer" then that's fine, but I would strongly suggest that a Jamal Crawford or whatever isn't the answer to seek out, it's still a complete basketball player or just someone who does something at the 2 or swing that isn't just "scores sort of efficiently on high usage."

[phifans]

Screw up to those who are thinking rob Noel from us. He's our third sure long term piece to me besides Embiid and Simmons. Just keep him and move on.

[HankTheTank]

Trading Noel now would be a classic sell low. Okafor is the one that needs to be moved because there is now way to find minutes for him. I wouldn't expect anything significant in return and don't care.

[eskimo]

Yep those elite rim protectors def come on the cheap...Oh wait, no they don't. Dedmon is the most decent of the cheap, otherwise I don't really know who you can point to on non-rookie deals who is cheap and good. And the rookies who are cheap are all lottery picks or guys who have new contract extensions waiting to kick in so it's not cheap from that perspective either.

A Noel is almost never cheap in this market, even with the glut of centers around the NBA. I don't disagree with much here in theory beyond that, but that was a real bad way to end an otherwise coherent post. Also it's worth mentioning that we don't know how Simmons/Noel works as a combo either.

I will always agree that Embiid/Noel as a tandem together should never be a thing more than like 5 minutes a half (and Noel/Embiid/Simmons should never really be a thing), but if we believe Embiid (or really any big) should never be counted on for 35+ minutes a night in regular season at this point, then 16-18 minutes as a backup, plus how he plays with Simmons might change a lot about the perspective.

It almost feels like a playoffs issue more than anything else. Noel will retain value barring injury in that he's got an easy skill set to fit on teams. It's why trading him at low value doesn't make much sense in that teams are always going to want a shot-blocking center who runs the floor. The Celtics could use him; the Blazers could use him; the Pelicans could use him; the Wolves could use him etc. He fits with the AD's of the world, and then he just fits as a sole big as well. He's malleable, even if the current market doesn't show it due to his own value being hurt by prior events and free agency status.

Good points. Let me clarify my opinions.

I think Noel is very valuable and worth a near max contract. I'm just not sure he is the right guy for the Sixers given assets and needs. I don't think you can reproduce what Nerlens does on the cheap- but I do think there will soon be cheap surplus centers that offer some economy. I think you could re-prioritize and use the money elsewhere. You sacrifice having Noel's freakish defensive skillset for the 16 min he would be playing C (I don't think his PF minutes will be all that valuable) and instead go with a combination of "Death" line-ups with Simmons/Saric/Covington frontcourts plus some minutes given to a cheap back-up center (like Holmes or a vet hit by the center glut that is coming.) Then you use the 20M+ savings to absorb the contract of a scoring perimeter player- someone like Beal but healthier.

Fair enough. A final thing I will say is that I don't think the Bookers and Knights, Wiggins, and Gays etc. of the world have much real-world value on the most elite NBA teams. I look at teams that have been champions in the past X number of years, and really none of them have that sort of player on their team (Kyrie is the closest thing, and he's a PG by definition in terms of defense so that doesn't really even work).

Beyond all the champions having a truly elite player (or at least someone playing elite by that time like the Spurs in various seasons near the end of their dynasty), they don't have those high usage points guys at guard. I honestly think those guys bring the least amount of value and cost the most based on that equation.

It's a separate point, but it's why I don't value a Monk like I would most others in the lottery. A Beal is different in that he is high usage and has a good assist rate for the position. But I think overall the non-PG scorer at guard is the most overvalued and least impactful position due to the usage they suck up and lack of defense or other value they provide. Even a Kyrie without LeBron is pushing it in terms of elite value, and he's even a point guard by definition. And even if you're saying "well, the Sixers need a scorer" then that's fine, but I would strongly suggest that a Jamal Crawford or whatever isn't the answer to seek out, it's still a complete basketball player or just someone who does something at the 2 or swing that isn't just "scores sort of efficiently on high usage."

I sort of agree that high volume, mediocre efficiency scoring without defense or playmaking isn't super valuable.

Monk is different from some of the other guys you mentioned. The difference is he could be a knockdown, athletic shooter who can get shots off under tight coverage. A guy like that exerts a tremendous amount of gravity so he creates assists and points just by standing at the break and eliminating his guy from help defense.

Now Monk seems to put the ball on the floor to create mid-range shots that he can hit and he also seems to bring value in transition with his athleticism. He is young so there may be more ability not yet unlocked within him.

If we're picking in the 7-10 range you have to consider him on a team with Simmons.

[Slizeezyc]

Good points. Let me clarify my opinions.

I think Noel is very valuable and worth a near max contract. I'm just not sure he is the right guy for the Sixers given assets and needs. I don't think you can reproduce what Nerlens does on the cheap- but I do think there will soon be cheap surplus centers that offer some economy. I think you could re-prioritize and use the money elsewhere. You sacrifice having Noel's freakish defensive skillset for the 16 min he would be playing C (I don't think his PF minutes will be all that valuable) and instead go with a combination of "Death" line-ups with Simmons/Saric/Covington frontcourts plus some minutes given to a cheap back-up center (like Holmes or a vet hit by the center glut that is coming.) Then you use the 20M+ savings to absorb the contract of a scoring perimeter player- someone like Beal but healthier.

Fair enough. A final thing I will say is that I don't think the Bookers and Knights, Wiggins, and Gays etc. of the world have much real-world value on the most elite NBA teams. I look at teams that have been champions in the past X number of years, and really none of them have that sort of player on their team (Kyrie is the closest thing, and he's a PG by definition in terms of defense so that doesn't really even work).

Beyond all the champions having a truly elite player (or at least someone playing elite by that time like the Spurs in various seasons near the end of their dynasty), they don't have those high usage points guys at guard. I honestly think those guys bring the least amount of value and cost the most based on that equation.

It's a separate point, but it's why I don't value a Monk like I would most others in the lottery. A Beal is different in that he is high usage and has a good assist rate for the position. But I think overall the non-PG scorer at guard is the most overvalued and least impactful position due to the usage they suck up and lack of defense or other value they provide. Even a Kyrie without LeBron is pushing it in terms of elite value, and he's even a point guard by definition. And even if you're saying "well, the Sixers need a scorer" then that's fine, but I would strongly suggest that a Jamal Crawford or whatever isn't the answer to seek out, it's still a complete basketball player or just someone who does something at the 2 or swing that isn't just "scores sort of efficiently on high usage."

I sort of agree that high volume, mediocre efficiency scoring without defense or playmaking isn't super valuable.

Monk is different from some of the other guys you mentioned. The difference is he could be a knockdown, athletic shooter who can get shots off under tight coverage. A guy like that exerts a tremendous amount of gravity so he creates assists and points just by standing at the break and eliminating his guy from help defense.

Now Monk seems to put the ball on the floor to create mid-range shots that he can hit and he also seems to bring value in transition with his athleticism. He is young so there may be more ability not yet unlocked within him.

If we're picking in the 7-10 range you have to consider him on a team with Simmons.

I don't want to side track this further but...

I'm fine with projecting on draft prospects (as that's what everyone does), but as it stands he's:

-Got a weak frame
-Bad defensive instincts (on and off ball)
-Doesn't get to the line or create well in halfcourt against elite athleticism
-Hasn't shown to be a great playmaker

So I would say he's LaVine or a Crawford at this point if you want to project out as hopeful and realistic expectations. He's not going to be able to switch, and it's asking a lot for him even being able to navigate a pick and roll on defense. He has the athleticism to get better, but even if you project out, he's not going to be an elite PG defender (frame, measurables and track record point to it being a smallish chance), and without the ability to switch much as well, he's got far more outcomes that end up with him as a net negative on that end.

And I'm not trying to say that doesn't have value, just I don't think it ends up being surplus value most of the time, no matter how much he has an ability to shoot or get a shot off. He's also shown a severe lack of finishing ability against elite athleticism in non-open court situations (much like Ball), which is very worrying because with him it's all offense -- it's the reason you would draft him.

[Ericb5]

https://theringer.com/the-nbas-midseason-arms-race-is-upon-us-158ff3ee2b86#.kxa7a54gj

good read.

TLDR - the lillard-mccollum duo works but not on d.
blazers should take notes from the monta ellis-bogut swap for rim protection.

article suggests "The Blazers send McCollum to the Sixers for Noel, the Sixers’ unprotected 2017 first, the Kings’ top-10-protected 2018 first (which is becomes unprotected in 2019), and multiple second-round picks."

the kings pick - the info they have is wrong? but yeah that pacakge is wayyyy to much for me at least. way to much.

Yeah, all love to CJ but I wouldn't trade our unprotected 2017 for him let alone that boatload.

Me either.

That is crazy talk to suggest such a package for CJ.

I wouldn't even trade Noel and the Lakers pick for him. I would trade that(Noel and Lakers pick, not the original deal) for someone like Butler, but not CJ.

At this point, I don't think that there are any players potentially available that I would want to trade Noel and one of those picks for.

I would rather trade Okafor, and just take the BPA at both of those picks, knowing full well that there are a lot of prospects on the same level that fit our team.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sportfan73]

https://theringer.com/the-nbas-midseason-arms-race-is-upon-us-158ff3ee2b86#.kxa7a54gj

good read.

TLDR - the lillard-mccollum duo works but not on d.
blazers should take notes from the monta ellis-bogut swap for rim protection.

article suggests "The Blazers send McCollum to the Sixers for Noel, the Sixers’ unprotected 2017 first, the Kings’ top-10-protected 2018 first (which is becomes unprotected in 2019), and multiple second-round picks."

the kings pick - the info they have is wrong? but yeah that pacakge is wayyyy to much for me at least. way to much.

Yeah, all love to CJ but I wouldn't trade our unprotected 2017 for him let alone that boatload.

Me either.

That is crazy talk to suggest such a package for CJ.

I wouldn't even trade Noel and the Lakers pick for him. I would trade that(Noel and Lakers pick, not the original deal) for someone like Butler, but not CJ.

At this point, I don't think that there are any players potentially available that I would want to trade Noel and one of those picks for.

I would rather trade Okafor, and just take the BPA at both of those picks, knowing full well that there are a lot of prospects on the same level that fit our team.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Trade jah for whatever we can get. Take bpa with both top 8 picks. Match any offer on Nerlens. Sign one placeholder fa that fits with the team. I want mills or holiday. Mills will come cheaper.



Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[ProcessDoctor]

I consider Noel a core piece. Unless someone like Porter or Beal becomes available in a trade STRAIGHT UP for him, he should stay put.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[MatthewGeigerII]

looking at the 2017 nba draft (nbadraft.net, for quick access):

without names, here is the lottery by position.

1.PG
2.PG
3. PG
4. PG
5. SG/SF
6. SF
7. PG
8. SG
9.SF/PF
10. PF
11. PF
12. PF
13. PF/C (Bam Adebayo)

the next center? 19. Marques Bolden.
No other prospects listed IN THE FIRST ROUND!



So. why do we care?

If a team wants a highly touted young center prospect under 22 y/o. they will NOT be able to draft one next season.
IMO, that alone should drive up the value of both Nerlens AND jahlil. that's why i am inclined to maybe hold on to them until the draft too...



sidenote. what a great draft for a team that needs PG-SG-SF to have two lotto picks
2018 is full of center/power forward prospects tho...

[hookshot199]

Times are changing. Thankfully this organization seems focused on the long-term instead of the short-term. That means restrict Embiid to 30-32 mpg in the regular season. Run a legit 9 man rotation. Only play him more than that in the playoffs.

That would be the smart thing to do long-term.

I keep hearing this... but what first or second or third team All-NBA players average that kind of minutes?

I quickly reviewed last year's list, and the lowest minutes I found was:

LMA 30.6 min... up to 32.4 min this year
Drummond 33 min
Kawhi 33 min
CP3 33 min
Klay 33 min

So of the top 15 players, one got <31 min, 4 got <34 min and the other 10 got 34+ min.
Sure it could happen- and having Noel makes it possible. I'm just not sure I see a team that is fighting for a playoff seed going the route unless they are a runaway top 2 seed like SAS or GSW.

Guys like Shaq used to play 38-40 min a night. Those days are over. But there is a big difference between dropping to 34-53 min and dropping to 30 minutes in terms of winning games.

Good work, TK. And we have the added issue that Embiid and Noel - probably - should be restricted to fewer than 35 minutes because of their injury histories. I'm not a doctor - or their doctor - but people trying to make the Shaq comparison forget that he ran the court like a freight train not a gazelle.

We're getting a clearer picture of what Saric can and can't do. We still need data on Simmons' D. We'll get a guard out of the draft, whether it's our pick or the Lakers pick or both. And we'll get a high second round pick (probably 35 or 36). We'll get something for Okafor. And we've got Korkmaz stashed.

And no cap problem for two to three years.

Moving Noel doesn't make sense.

[spikeslovechild]

Times are changing. Thankfully this organization seems focused on the long-term instead of the short-term. That means restrict Embiid to 30-32 mpg in the regular season. Run a legit 9 man rotation. Only play him more than that in the playoffs.

That would be the smart thing to do long-term.

I keep hearing this... but what first or second or third team All-NBA players average that kind of minutes?

I quickly reviewed last year's list, and the lowest minutes I found was:

LMA 30.6 min... up to 32.4 min this year
Drummond 33 min
Kawhi 33 min
CP3 33 min
Klay 33 min

So of the top 15 players, one got <31 min, 4 got <34 min and the other 10 got 34+ min.
Sure it could happen- and having Noel makes it possible. I'm just not sure I see a team that is fighting for a playoff seed going the route unless they are a runaway top 2 seed like SAS or GSW.

Guys like Shaq used to play 38-40 min a night. Those days are over. But there is a big difference between dropping to 34-53 min and dropping to 30 minutes in terms of winning games.

Good work, TK. And we have the added issue that Embiid and Noel - probably - should be restricted to fewer than 35 minutes because of their injury histories. I'm not a doctor - or their doctor - but people trying to make the Shaq comparison forget that he ran the court like a freight train not a gazelle.

We're getting a clearer picture of what Saric can and can't do. We still need data on Simmons' D. We'll get a guard out of the draft, whether it's our pick or the Lakers pick or both. And we'll get a high second round pick (probably 35 or 36). We'll get something for Okafor. And we've got Korkmaz stashed.

And no cap problem for two to three years.

Moving Noel doesn't make sense.

Moving Noel makes a ton of sense. Lets say we Embiid doesn't play 36 minutes. Instead he plays 33-34 minutes. That leaves 14-15 minutes as a backup.

That is really the only need Noel would be filling. Once Simmons comes back he'll be playing starting minutes at PF. We have Saric. We have Holmes. All are making peanuts and can backup Simmons more then adequately.

Saying we don't have a cap problem is sort of missing the point. We aren't good. We aren't the Cavaliers who can throw max money backup centers because they have Love-Lebron-Irving. We don't have those players already in place. We need the cap flexibility to go out and sign a big name free agent. Or take on the contract of one via trade.

The only way I see it make sense is if Simmons lights up the league we get a high a draft pick and we get another free agent like say Howard to sign with us. At that point the FO may feel they are ready to go for it. They may decide to overpay Noel not only as a player but for the role.

The other way I see it make sense if the FO convinces him he is a 10 million dollar player and is willing to take backup money and play at most 20 minutes a night (likely less). Neither do I see as overly realistic.

[Sportfan73]

I keep hearing this... but what first or second or third team All-NBA players average that kind of minutes?

I quickly reviewed last year's list, and the lowest minutes I found was:

LMA 30.6 min... up to 32.4 min this year
Drummond 33 min
Kawhi 33 min
CP3 33 min
Klay 33 min

So of the top 15 players, one got <31 min, 4 got <34 min and the other 10 got 34+ min.
Sure it could happen- and having Noel makes it possible. I'm just not sure I see a team that is fighting for a playoff seed going the route unless they are a runaway top 2 seed like SAS or GSW.

Guys like Shaq used to play 38-40 min a night. Those days are over. But there is a big difference between dropping to 34-53 min and dropping to 30 minutes in terms of winning games.

Good work, TK. And we have the added issue that Embiid and Noel - probably - should be restricted to fewer than 35 minutes because of their injury histories. I'm not a doctor - or their doctor - but people trying to make the Shaq comparison forget that he ran the court like a freight train not a gazelle.

We're getting a clearer picture of what Saric can and can't do. We still need data on Simmons' D. We'll get a guard out of the draft, whether it's our pick or the Lakers pick or both. And we'll get a high second round pick (probably 35 or 36). We'll get something for Okafor. And we've got Korkmaz stashed.

And no cap problem for two to three years.

Moving Noel doesn't make sense.

Moving Noel makes a ton of sense. Lets say we Embiid doesn't play 36 minutes. Instead he plays 33-34 minutes. That leaves 14-15 minutes as a backup.

That is really the only need Noel would be filling. Once Simmons comes back he'll be playing starting minutes at PF. We have Saric. We have Holmes. All are making peanuts and can backup Simmons more then adequately.

Saying we don't have a cap problem is sort of missing the point. We aren't good. We aren't the Cavaliers who can throw max money backup centers because they have Love-Lebron-Irving. We don't have those players already in place. We need the cap flexibility to go out and sign a big name free agent. Or take on the contract of one via trade.

The only way I see it make sense is if Simmons lights up the league we get a high a draft pick and we get another free agent like say Howard to sign with us. At that point the FO may feel they are ready to go for it. They may decide to overpay Noel not only as a player but for the role.

The other way I see it make sense if the FO convinces him he is a 10 million dollar player and is willing to take backup money and play at most 20 minutes a night (likely less). Neither do I see as overly realistic.

Your forgetting that embiid needs to prove he can be healthy for two or three years, not half of a season.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app