2016-2017 College Basketball / '17 NBA Draft Thread IV

[Sixerscan]

would you guys trade your #3 pick for D'angelo Russell?

Nah

[smittybanton]

The Phoenix Suns are hopeful Lonzo Ball could slide to them at No. 4. The front office believes Ball is a good fit in their system alongside Devin Booker.

The Suns could trade Eric Bledsoe if they select Ball or another point guard such as De'Aaron Fox.

I had them pegged for a small forward all the way. A little surprised by the Ball thing. But that works for us if true.

If the Lakers take Fox, we take Ball and either keep him or trade Ball (#3) to Phoenix for #4 and Eric Bledsoe. That's probably too much, so we throw in Okafor (as the Suns have only 57-year old Tyson Chandler and RFA Alex Len and RFA Alan Williams) and they throw in their rights to MIA21. If MIA21 is too much, #3 and Okafor and #4 and Bledsoe is a perfectly acceptable outcome.

At #4 we take Josh Jackson, then we go hard after Sacramento's #10 pick (TJ Maxx, Justin Anderson, Furkan Korkmaz, OKC20(x20).

Eric Bledsoe, Malik Monk (#10), Josh Jackson. Who says no?

I'd do that deal. I don't think Monk falls to ten, buts that is on you guys. Okafor and the Ball for Bledsoe and #4.

True. Monk might not make it to #10, especially if his workouts continue to go well. However, assuming Minnesota goes Zach Collins or Markannen, one of Dennis Smith Jr, Frank Ntilikina or Malik Monk has to be there at #10. Two of them, if both Collins and Markannen go in the top ten. A lot of people here would also be quite comfortable with Donovan Mitchell.

Shoot, I'll take Zach Collins at #10 in a minute, considering we just gave y'all Okafor. Take those spare parts that won't be part of our future and turn that into a backup center we can grow with.

[Ericb5]

I would only do 3 for 5 and 10 if I knew either Smith or Monk would be there at 10. I'm not trading Josh Jackson for Isaac and Markkanen or Monk and Markkanen.

Well unfortunately you won't know if they will be there at 10 at the time of making the trade. If we traded down from 3 to 5 we would clearly be passing on Fox and Jackson, but that would still mean that Tatum, Issac, and Smith would be there at 5, and none of those guys are huge drop offs from Jackson.

When 10 rolled around I think that Monk or Ntilikina would be there at 10. Now you couldn't take Smith at 5 and Monk at 10, but if you took Smith at 5 you could take Ntilikina, or one of the stretch 4's.

I wouldn't trade down from 3 to 5 and 10 unless we already weren't sold on Jackson. If Jackson is our favorite guy on the board I would be more inclined to just stay and take him.

The other option would be if the Suns and Kings both wanted Fox, then you could possibly trade down with the Suns just because the threat of us trading with the Kings could make the Suns miss their guy.

What could we get from the Suns to go from 3 to 4 and still take Jackson? If they would do Okafor and 3 for Bledsoe and 4(as the suns fan above mentioned) then I would prefer to do that and keep Jackson vs going back to 5 and missing out on Jackson even though we could also get the 10th pick in that deal.

In general, I value Jackson highly, but if 5 and 10 was really on the board for us I would think really hard about it, and just hope that Phoenix would step in before we made the deal because they wanted Fox, and were afraid that we would trade him out from under their noses. We need to hope that both Phoenix and Sacramento get hard ons for Fox.

[Unbreakable99]

would you guys trade your #3 pick for D'angelo Russell?

No but I think I would trade you back your 18 pick for Russell.

[Sixerscan]

I would only do 3 for 5 and 10 if I knew either Smith or Monk would be there at 10. I'm not trading Josh Jackson for Isaac and Markkanen or Monk and Markkanen.

Well unfortunately you won't know if they will be there at 10 at the time of making the trade. If we traded down from 3 to 5 we would clearly be passing on Fox and Jackson, but that would still mean that Tatum, Issac, and Smith would be there at 5, and none of those guys are huge drop offs from Jackson.

When 10 rolled around I think that Monk or Ntilikina would be there at 10. Now you couldn't take Smith at 5 and Monk at 10, but if you took Smith at 5 you could take Ntilikina, or one of the stretch 4's.

I wouldn't trade down from 3 to 5 and 10 unless we already weren't sold on Jackson. If Jackson is our favorite guy on the board I would be more inclined to just stay and take him.

The other option would be if the Suns and Kings both wanted Fox, then you could possibly trade down with the Suns just because the threat of us trading with the Kings could make the Suns miss their guy.

What could we get from the Suns to go from 3 to 4 and still take Jackson? If they would do Okafor and 3 for Bledsoe and 4(as the suns fan above mentioned) then I would prefer to do that and keep Jackson vs going back to 5 and missing out on Jackson even though we could also get the 10th pick in that deal.

In general, I value Jackson highly, but if 5 and 10 was really on the board for us I would think really hard about it, and just hope that Phoenix would step in before we made the deal because they wanted Fox, and were afraid that we would trade him out from under their noses. We need to hope that both Phoenix and Sacramento get hard ons for Fox.

I don't think you can trade back to 5 unless the guy you wanted at 3 would still be available at 5. Don't play games.

[smittybanton]

would you guys trade your #3 pick for D'angelo Russell?

No but I think I would trade you back your 18 pick for Russell.

Agreed.

Then, I need us to package 2nds, capspace, and/or players to get TJ Leaf (Chi #16, POR #20).

I wouldn't give a damn what free agents we got after that.

D'Angelo Russell and Josh Jackson and TJ Leaf completes the cipher. From there, guys just have to improve.

[SelfishPlayer]

Jonathan Isaac is like a less talented version of Darius Miles.

Watch on YouTube

[LongLiveHinkie]

Well, remember, you don't technically "trade down" in the NBA. You trade rights to players.

So say hypothetically the Sixers took Fox for the Kings at 3, and then the players they wanted at 5 and 10 weren't there. They could just keep Fox if they like him. But it's just a tough scenario because what if a player the Sixers like is there at 5 and the Kings took him for the Sixers, but then a player they wanted at 10 isn't there. It's just a mess all around.

I probably wouldn't trade down. I would have last week, but changed my mind.

[Skates]

I would absolutely trade down to 5 and 10. There are a lot of near or same talent level guys who would be there at 5, and 10 is pretty much guaranteed to have some nice choices available.

[LongLiveHinkie]

Elon Venekurov(sp?) was on CSN and he listed his top players for the Sixers and didn't list Jackson at all. His reason? You guessed it. "Not a fit with Ben Simmons."

This is why I started that topic weeks ago, I'm so freaking tired of hearing it. I love Ben Simmons. Love, love, love the guy. But who the hell are the Sixers to not draft someone based off of a fit with a dude who has yet to play an NBA game yet. I'm so freaking tired of hearing about fit with Simmons.

[Kobeallday]

would you guys trade your #3 pick for D'angelo Russell?

No but I think I would trade you back your 18 pick for Russell.

haha, dream on

[BigSleep333]

would you guys trade your #3 pick for D'angelo Russell?

No but I think I would trade you back your 18 pick for Russell.

haha, dream on

why the hell would we want dlo? i wouldnt trade you the premium asset LAL18 pick. top 5 pick for dlo? are you guys drunk?

i would give you okafor+a 2nd...and wouldnt be disappointed or think twice about it if you instantly hang up the phone. keep your lil, no defense playing, meh shooting, underwhelming overall snitch on your fcked up roster. thx

[JoelNoel]

would you guys trade your #3 pick for D'angelo Russell?

No but I think I would trade you back your 18 pick for Russell.

haha, dream on

You think you're getting a top 3 pick for Bustle. Who is dreaming??

[Unbreakable99]

would you guys trade your #3 pick for D'angelo Russell?

No but I think I would trade you back your 18 pick for Russell.

haha, dream on

No sweat off my back. I gave you my value. I like Russell so I would give up something of value but if you don't want the 18 pick it's fine by me. Keep him then.

[Negrodamus]

No but I think I would trade you back your 18 pick for Russell.

haha, dream on

No sweat off my back. I gave you my value. I like Russell so I would give up something of value but if you don't want the 18 pick it's fine by me. Keep him then.

It'd probably be in their best interest to do that to ensure they completely suck so the can get Mo Bamba or Ayton. But some people only look a month at a time.

[Unbreakable99]

haha, dream on

No sweat off my back. I gave you my value. I like Russell so I would give up something of value but if you don't want the 18 pick it's fine by me. Keep him then.

It'd probably be in their best interest to do that to ensure they completely suck so the can get Mo Bamba or Ayton. But some people only look a month at a time.

Yeah. If we did in fact trade back and got the 5th and 10th pick I would trade our 10th pick for Russell. I'd do that. Would I trade our 5th pick for Russell? I think he might be worth that but I like Isaac better so I would rather draft Isaac if he's there at 5.

[BigSleep333]

haha, dream on

No sweat off my back. I gave you my value. I like Russell so I would give up something of value but if you don't want the 18 pick it's fine by me. Keep him then.

It'd probably be in their best interest to do that to ensure they completely suck so the can get Mo Bamba or Ayton. But some people only look a month at a time.

you really think parting with dlo would make the lakers worse?? theres more of a decent chance the opposite is true

[Negrodamus]

No sweat off my back. I gave you my value. I like Russell so I would give up something of value but if you don't want the 18 pick it's fine by me. Keep him then.

It'd probably be in their best interest to do that to ensure they completely suck so the can get Mo Bamba or Ayton. But some people only look a month at a time.

you really think parting with dlo would make the lakers worse?? theres more of a decent chance the opposite is true

3rd year as a pro and has improved statistically every year. Mix in another top pick in this draft, Ingram a year older, Randle a year older... I don't think they're going to be good next year, but they would be worse without Russell.

[BigSleep333]

It'd probably be in their best interest to do that to ensure they completely suck so the can get Mo Bamba or Ayton. But some people only look a month at a time.

you really think parting with dlo would make the lakers worse?? theres more of a decent chance the opposite is true

3rd year as a pro and has improved statistically every year. Mix in another top pick in this draft, Ingram a year older, Randle a year older... I don't think they're going to be good next year, but they would be worse without Russell.

i could also improve from 10% shooting to 15 %...so what? he is poor in almost every category. dlo is the equivalent of okafor at PG/SG. his defense is as bad as jahs...as hard it is to believe. he flashes on offense with a nice move here and there (jah says hi).

he shoots 40%fg and 35% 3's. 2nd worst assist/to ratio of all PG's in the league with atrocious defense. maybe you guys have to watch more lakers games..(though i cant recommend that)

[BigSleep333]

oh and to prove my point with more numbers;

according to nbawowy:
ORTG
lakers with dlo: 104,3
lakers without dlo: 108,5

DRTG
lakers with dlo: 113,6
lakers without dlo: 113,5

opponents shooting 3%
with dlo: 37,9%
without dlo: 36,2%