Fixing the Mess Pt. 2 Sixers Offseason

Post #421 » by **Stanford** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:59 am

I think this means we have even more leverage.

davesilver · Post #422 » by **davesilver** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:00 am

Man... this has got to be one of the most difficult decisions of Morey's career lol

eyeatoma · Post #423 » by **eyeatoma** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:00 am

Stanford wrote:I think this means we have even more leverage.

How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.

cool93 · Post #424 » by **cool93** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:05 am

eyeatoma wrote:
Stanford wrote:I think this means we have even more leverage.

How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.

I mean, there is logic. Most teams would be reluctant to offer much. Boston, Denver and other were good enough in playoffs, that they won't risk trading young stars for Harden with those news.
We are bad and desperate enough to still give Ben. But we can tell that it's either Brooklyns crap or Ben+Al for Harden+Roco. And I think I'd still much rather take Ben if I'm Rockets.

Sent from my G3416 using RealGM mobile app

Post #425 » by **Stanford** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:06 am

eyeatoma wrote:
Stanford wrote:I think this means we have even more leverage.

How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.

Because why would a team give up assets for Harden when he won’t want to play there long term? Unlikely, right? That's us. We're the team. When Toronto was in our position, all they had to give up was DeRozan, a negative asset, for Kawhi, because he didn't want to play for them.

I think this is our big break, lads. Huge news.

DT RAW · Post #426 » by **DT RAW** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:07 am

Lmfao. Any one of u thinking we can or will get harden without simmons just doesnt understand much of anything

eyeatoma · Post #427 » by **eyeatoma** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:07 am

cool93 wrote:
eyeatoma wrote:
Stanford wrote:I think this means we have even more leverage.

How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.
I mean, there is logic. Most teams would be reluctant to offer much. Boston, Denver and other were good enough in playoffs, that they won't risk trading young stars for Harden with those news.
We are bad and desperate enough to still give Ben. But we can tell that it's either Brooklyns crap or Ben+Al for Harden+Roco. And I think I'd still much rather take Ben if I'm Rockets.

Sent from my G3416 using RealGM mobile app

True, but then we'd still have to offer Ben. I feel like if we offer Ben it's a done deal. I thought Stanford meant that if we offered everyone but Ben then we'd have leverage. As much as Dinwiddie and LeVert aren't stars, they're still better than everything we have except Ben or Jo.

stormi · Post #428 » by **stormi** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:08 am

Stanford wrote:
eyeatoma wrote:
Stanford wrote:I think this means we have even more leverage.

How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.

Because why would a team give up assets for Harden when he won’t want to play there long term? Unlikely, right? That's us. We're the team. When Toronto was in our position, all they had to give up was DeRozan, a negative asset, for Kawhi, because he didn't want to play for them.

I think this is our big break, lads. Huge news.

eyeatoma · Post #429 » by **eyeatoma** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:08 am

Stanford wrote:
eyeatoma wrote:
Stanford wrote:I think this means we have even more leverage.

How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.

Because why would a team give up assets for Harden when he won’t want to play there long term? Unlikely, right? That's us. We're the team. When Toronto was in our position, all they had to give up was DeRozan, a negative asset, for Kawhi, because he didn't want to play for them.

I think this is our big break, lads. Huge news.

I guess I don't follow. If we give even less now, what's stopping the rockets from accepting the Net's offer. Are you saying that with Ben we have more leverage?

Post #430 » by **Stanford** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:09 am

stormi wrote:
Stanford wrote:
eyeatoma wrote:
How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.

Because why would a team give up assets for Harden when he won’t want to play there long term? Unlikely, right? That's us. We're the team. When Toronto was in our position, all they had to give up was DeRozan, a negative asset, for Kawhi, because he didn't want to play for them.

I think this is our big break, lads. Huge news.

Think BIGGER, my dude

Post #431 » by **Stanford** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:10 am

DT RAW wrote:Lmfao. Any one of u thinking we can or will get harden without simmons just doesnt understand much of anything

How about this. We trade for Levert, Dinwiddie and Allen, individually, and then offer that package to Houston.

davesilver · Post #432 » by **davesilver** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:12 am

Stanford wrote:
DT RAW wrote:Lmfao. Any one of u thinking we can or will get harden without simmons just doesnt understand much of anything

How about this. We trade for Levert, Dinwiddie and Allen, individually, and then offer that package to Houston.

Ah Mr. Bryan Colangelo. Welcome back!

cool93 · Post #433 » by **cool93** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:12 am

Stanford wrote:
eyeatoma wrote:
Stanford wrote:I think this means we have even more leverage.

How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.

Because why would a team give up assets for Harden when he won’t want to play there long term? Unlikely, right? That's us. We're the team. When Toronto was in our position, all they had to give up was DeRozan, a negative asset, for Kawhi, because he didn't want to play for them.

I think this is our big break, lads. Huge news.

Nah, we still have to beat Nets offer. And that requires Ben.

Sent from my G3416 using RealGM mobile app

davesilver · Post #434 » by **davesilver** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:13 am

Stanford wrote:
eyeatoma wrote:
Stanford wrote:I think this means we have even more leverage.

How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.

Because why would a team give up assets for Harden when he won’t want to play there long term? Unlikely, right? That's us. We're the team. When Toronto was in our position, all they had to give up was DeRozan, a negative asset, for Kawhi, because he didn't want to play for them.

I think this is our big break, lads. Huge news.

I've been staring at this post for 5 minutes trying to wrap my head around this logic lmao

Post #435 » by **sixers hoops** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:13 am

eyeatoma wrote:
Stanford wrote:
eyeatoma wrote:
How so? We'd still have to offer Ben.

Because why would a team give up assets for Harden when he won’t want to play there long term? Unlikely, right? That's us. We're the team. When Toronto was in our position, all they had to give up was DeRozan, a negative asset, for Kawhi, because he didn't want to play for them.

I think this is our big break, lads. Huge news.

I guess I don't follow. If we give even less now, what's stopping the rockets from accepting the Net's offer. Are you saying that with Ben we have more leverage?

He’s doing 4th level thinking. It’s so deep, not even he understands it. But basically it’s like Morey is doing the Obi Wan Kenobi thing to the Rockets front office since they have a player who doesn’t want to be there.

the_process · Post #436 » by **the_process** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:14 am

Arsenal wrote:If the Rockets really want to continue as a playoff team, they'll likely try to convince either Harden or Westbrook to stay as long as they trade the other. The problem is they can't coexist.

If we can flip Horford plus into Hield, that may change things from Houstons perspective into being fine doing a deal without Ben. Something like this (sprinkle in picks where needed):

Sixers trade:
CE Al Horford
PF Tobias Harris
SG Matisse Thybulle
SG Shake Milton

Sixers receive:
PG James Harden
SG Eric Gordon

Rockets trade:
PG James Harden
SG Eric Gordon

Rockets receive:
PF Tobias Harris
SG Buddy Hield
SG Matisse Thybulle

Kings trade:
SG Buddy Hield

Kings receive:
CE Al Horford
SG Shake Milton

Sixers lineup:
PG Harden | FA
SG Gordon | Smith
SF JRich | Korkmaz
PF Simmons | Scott
CE Embiid | FA

Rockets lineup (trade Tucker for a Center later):
PG Westbrook | Rivers
SG Hield | Thybulle | McLemore
SF Covington | House
PF Harris
CE Tucker

Kings lineup:
PG Fox | Joseph
SG Bogs | Milton
SF Barnes | #12
PF Bagley | Bjelica
CE Horford | Holmes

This isn't a terrible idea, but it's going to take at least one 1st to get SAC to trade Hield for Horford.

eyeatoma · Post #437 » by **eyeatoma** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:15 am

sixers hoops wrote:
eyeatoma wrote:
Stanford wrote:
Because why would a team give up assets for Harden when he won’t want to play there long term? Unlikely, right? That's us. We're the team. When Toronto was in our position, all they had to give up was DeRozan, a negative asset, for Kawhi, because he didn't want to play for them.

I think this is our big break, lads. Huge news.

I guess I don't follow. If we give even less now, what's stopping the rockets from accepting the Net's offer. Are you saying that with Ben we have more leverage?

He’s doing 4th level thinking. It’s so deep, not even he understands it. But basically it’s like Morey is doing the Obi Wan Kenobi thing to the Rockets front office since they have a player who doesn’t want to be there.

Yeah if Morey can use the force then by all means. I think the rockets are on the dark side though, and Ben is their Kylo Ren.

Post #438 » by **Stanford** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:16 am

I'm an AI trained on posts from this thread

fl311 · Post #439 » by **fl311** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:17 am

If Ben was being offered, Harden would already be a Sixer

cool93 · Post #440 » by **cool93** » Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:17 am

the_process wrote:
Arsenal wrote:If the Rockets really want to continue as a playoff team, they'll likely try to convince either Harden or Westbrook to stay as long as they trade the other. The problem is they can't coexist.

If we can flip Horford plus into Hield, that may change things from Houstons perspective into being fine doing a deal without Ben. Something like this (sprinkle in picks where needed):

Sixers trade:
CE Al Horford
PF Tobias Harris
SG Matisse Thybulle
SG Shake Milton

Sixers receive:
PG James Harden
SG Eric Gordon

Rockets trade:
PG James Harden
SG Eric Gordon

Rockets receive:
PF Tobias Harris
SG Buddy Hield
SG Matisse Thybulle

Kings trade:
SG Buddy Hield

Kings receive:
CE Al Horford
SG Shake Milton

Sixers lineup:
PG Harden | FA
SG Gordon | Smith
SF JRich | Korkmaz
PF Simmons | Scott
CE Embiid | FA

Rockets lineup (trade Tucker for a Center later):
PG Westbrook | Rivers
SG Hield | Thybulle | McLemore
SF Covington | House
PF Harris
CE Tucker

Kings lineup:
PG Fox | Joseph
SG Bogs | Milton
SF Barnes | #12
PF Bagley | Bjelica
CE Horford | Holmes

This isn't a terrible idea, but it's going to take at least one 1st to get SAC to trade Hield for Horford.

The Rockets get 1 AWFUL contract, 1 pretty bad contract and Thybulle for Harden. Yeah, that's not a terruble idea.

Sent from my G3416 using RealGM mobile app