2017 Draft Discussion Part 4: 3 Day Countdown!

thamadkant · Post #561 » by **thamadkant** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:00 pm

GeraldsGreenery wrote:Gambo just said the Spurs are trying to move up to #3......here we go

Spurs know a franchise playwr when they see one.

thamadkant · Post #562 » by **thamadkant** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:00 pm

Aldridge for pick 3 lol....

Saberestar · Post #563 » by **Saberestar** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:00 pm

TOO wrote:
Saberestar wrote:
TOO wrote:
With what exactly? Danny Green? Dejounte Murray? Yeah, don't see how that happens.

OMG
If they go there Jackson would be an Spur for life. Imagine Leonard and Jackson switching on the perimeter.

They can offer Aldridge, Dejounte Murray and future picks.

Aldridge is on the way down, Murray is meh, future picks will be low, can't see it.

Yeah, but he would be great for a couple of years next to Horford. They would spread the floor so well for Isaiah.
If they attach a couple unprotected future picks can be a really good offer.

JMac1 · Post #564 » by **JMac1** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:03 pm

Why would teams move up to three? If everyone thinks Bos is drafting Tatum, let them, then a smart team would ask to trade with us. Asking for 4 is less than 3 in cost. Plus, we are very fluid when it comes to trading, we are not competing, Bos is, so they have to proceed with caution in all of their trades. We are open to young and older guys i.e. KP or Butler.

Damkac · Post #565 » by **Damkac** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:06 pm

Next rumor coming: Suns interested in trading #4 for Aldridge.

WeekapaugGroove · Post #566 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:08 pm

If the Spurs did move up to 3 I highly doubt it's for Jackson. My bet would be Fox. I would also assume the reason it's rumored they would move to 3 is that Aldrige is the key piece of the deal and he really only makes sense for Boston.

Saberestar · Post #567 » by **Saberestar** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:09 pm

JMac1 wrote:Why would teams move up to three? If everyone thinks Bos is drafting Tatum, let them, then a smart team would ask to trade with us. Asking for 4 is less than 3 in cost. Plus, we are very fluid when it comes to trading, we are not competing, Bos is, so they have to proceed with caution in all of their trades. We are open to young and older guys i.e. KP or Butler.

I think that whoever is trading for #3 wants to draft Jackson. Boston is shopping the pick...if they don't get a big and good offer they will pick Jackson or Tatum...probably Tatum. But there are not guarantees that Jackson will be available at #4.

He is BPA at #3 without question IMO. He dominates games defensively...he is so good on defense, he is like a veteran understanding the game on that side of the floor.

Villalobos · Post #568 » by **Villalobos** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:10 pm

Damkac wrote:Next rumor coming: Suns interested in trading #4 for Aldridge.

TheFire · Post #569 » by **TheFire** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:12 pm

WeekapaugGroove wrote:If the Spurs did move up to 3 I highly doubt it's for Jackson. My bet would be Fox. I would also assume the reason it's rumored they would move to 3 is that Aldrige is the key piece of the deal and he really only makes sense for Boston.

I would get the impression Isaac would be their guy; he just seems like a perfect fit there. None of the Spurs' bigs can switch on the perimeter as per WCF.

WeekapaugGroove · Post #570 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:18 pm

TheFire wrote:
WeekapaugGroove wrote:If the Spurs did move up to 3 I highly doubt it's for Jackson. My bet would be Fox. I would also assume the reason it's rumored they would move to 3 is that Aldrige is the key piece of the deal and he really only makes sense for Boston.

I would get the impression Isaac would be their guy; he just seems like a perfect fit there. None of the Spurs' bigs can switch on the perimeter as per WCF.

You know you might just be on to something. He would be a great fit for them and it would be very Spurs like for them to come up and get my favorite player in the draft not named Fultz.

TheFire · Post #571 » by **TheFire** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:20 pm

WeekapaugGroove wrote:
TheFire wrote:
WeekapaugGroove wrote:If the Spurs did move up to 3 I highly doubt it's for Jackson. My bet would be Fox. I would also assume the reason it's rumored they would move to 3 is that Aldrige is the key piece of the deal and he really only makes sense for Boston.

I would get the impression Isaac would be their guy; he just seems like a perfect fit there. None of the Spurs' bigs can switch on the perimeter as per WCF.

You know you might just be on to something. He would be a great fit for them and it would be very Spurs like for them to come up and get my favorite player in the draft not named Fultz.

I'm a big fan of Isaac as well and would hate for that to happen. They would mold him into a 2-way beast a la Kawhi Leonard.

Christine-In-AZ · Post #572 » by **Christine-In-AZ** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:22 pm

DirtyDez wrote:
jredsaz wrote:
DarkHawk wrote:
I heard on NBA radio that the Bulls reached out to the C's to trade Butler for the 3rd pick and were denied by Boston.
If that's true, then Boston will have to make this pick based on who they want. Guessing Tatum might fit their need more.
Not sure who else they'd work with to make deal.

I read that too. I just don't know if I believe it. #3 for Butler straight up? Come on. How do the Cs turn that down?

Cause they're smart. If Butler had 3-4 years left I could see Boston doing it.

Butler straight for #3 is impossible
12.5m must go out for Celts. Crowder + 6mil in salary or Bradley+ 3.5mil in salary for examples

edit: Not sure how much a 3rd pick's $$ counts in transactions, so maybe it's only like 8-9 million current player outgoing for Celtics.

Christine-In-AZ · Post #573 » by **Christine-In-AZ** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:32 pm

NTB wrote:

Read on Twitter

hmm, that's what I'm hearing too

Saberestar · Post #574 » by **Saberestar** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:34 pm

One NBA exec told the Herald that Ainge would love to find a way to get North Carolina State point guard Dennis Smith Jr., who isn’t rated as high as the third overall pick. Another said the Celts were looking at perhaps moving down in the draft again and picking up another asset for their trouble.

Meanwhile, to give you an idea of how surreal this has all become, a coach from yet another team said that if you asked 10 different clubs what Ainge wanted, you’d get 10 different answers. “We call him the minister of disinformation,” he said. “He’s putting a lot of stuff out there.”

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/celtics/2017/06/danny_ainge_keeping_everyone_guessing_on_eve_of_nba_draft

sunsbum · Post #575 » by **sunsbum** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:40 pm

There's so much BS out there right now, just remember we are in the age of making up stories not actually reporting, wether you're talking politics or sports. Look at Jordan Shcultz and "Suns Insider". Remember last year how we were pretty sure a few rumors actually started from our very own message board? Who's to say this isn't the case on other teams boards.

Cutter · Post #576 » by **Cutter** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:49 pm

I definitely think some of these "experts" lurk on RealGM then post tweets based on "sources".

Post #577 » by **rsavaj** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:50 pm

MrMiyagi wrote:
Mr Puddles wrote: ...and to think i rooted for you to beat Cobra Kai!

TOO wrote:

SarcasticSun wrote:No way. If we can get Porzingis for anything not giving up Booker we should take it. A Booker+Porzingis combo would be one of if not the best under 25 pairing in the league. If Jackson never develops a jump shot he is nothing more than a role player. We already know what Porzingis is in the NBA, and his ceiling is through the roof. Not to mention he is only one year older than Jackson. Bottom line, if we can get Porzingis without giving up Booker, we do it.

Irrelevant though because I don't think they are serious about trading him, they just wanted to see if they could get a king's ransom for him.

I feel like some of you are drinking the National Sports Coverage Kool-Aid and forgetting we've got a damn talented roster already. Plus Jackson is so taylor made for our squad it's ridiculous. He's an intense defender, a great transition athlete that handles and passes the ball well. So his shot is inconsistent. We've got a sharp shooting 2-guard with two stretch bigs.

I think y'all are getting carried away with rosterbation. We have a chance to have a floor general (Ulis - yes, Ulis), an all-time scorer (Booker), a lock-down defender (Jackson), a unicorn (Bender), and one of the most athletic bigs in the NBA (Chriss) on the same roster around the same age, for the next decade. No need to over-think it now.

our super talented roster looks like it'll win <30 games next year

BobbieL · Post #578 » by **BobbieL** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:52 pm

1UPZ wrote:
GeraldsGreenery wrote:Gambo just said the Spurs are trying to move up to #3......here we go

Spurs know a franchise playwr when they see one.

thankfully the Spurs are dealing with Ainge and not the Kings

if this were the Kings - they would basically take them to the cleaners - but Ainge won't be fooled

I can easily see the Kings take Aldridge for the 5th pick

darealjuice · Post #579 » by **darealjuice** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:52 pm

rsavaj wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:
Mr Puddles wrote: ...and to think i rooted for you to beat Cobra Kai!

TOO wrote:

SarcasticSun wrote:No way. If we can get Porzingis for anything not giving up Booker we should take it. A Booker+Porzingis combo would be one of if not the best under 25 pairing in the league. If Jackson never develops a jump shot he is nothing more than a role player. We already know what Porzingis is in the NBA, and his ceiling is through the roof. Not to mention he is only one year older than Jackson. Bottom line, if we can get Porzingis without giving up Booker, we do it.

Irrelevant though because I don't think they are serious about trading him, they just wanted to see if they could get a king's ransom for him.

I feel like some of you are drinking the National Sports Coverage Kool-Aid and forgetting we've got a damn talented roster already. Plus Jackson is so taylor made for our squad it's ridiculous. He's an intense defender, a great transition athlete that handles and passes the ball well. So his shot is inconsistent. We've got a sharp shooting 2-guard with two stretch bigs.

I think y'all are getting carried away with rosterbation. We have a chance to have a floor general (Ulis - yes, Ulis), an all-time scorer (Booker), a lock-down defender (Jackson), a unicorn (Bender), and one of the most athletic bigs in the NBA (Chriss) on the same roster around the same age, for the next decade. No need to over-think it now.

our super talented roster looks like it'll win <30 games next year

The bulk of our core can't even buy a beer yet, no **** theyre winning under 30 games.

Post #580 » by **rsavaj** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:54 pm

darealjuice wrote:
rsavaj wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:

I feel like some of you are drinking the National Sports Coverage Kool-Aid and forgetting we've got a damn talented roster already. Plus Jackson is so taylor made for our squad it's ridiculous. He's an intense defender, a great transition athlete that handles and passes the ball well. So his shot is inconsistent. We've got a sharp shooting 2-guard with two stretch bigs.

I think y'all are getting carried away with rosterbation. We have a chance to have a floor general (Ulis - yes, Ulis), an all-time scorer (Booker), a lock-down defender (Jackson), a unicorn (Bender), and one of the most athletic bigs in the NBA (Chriss) on the same roster around the same age, for the next decade. No need to over-think it now.

our super talented roster looks like it'll win <30 games next year

The bulk of our core can't even buy a beer yet, no **** theyre winning under 30 games.

that's a good point

still not sold on us having this treasure chest of riches as far as talent is concerned. right now it's 100% potential. I hope it turns out(because I really like Ulis, Chriss, Bender, Warren, Booker, etc.), but not all of them are gonna hit.