Season Speculation, Trade Ideas & Discussion Pt. 4

[TeamTragic]

Just came back and we are talking about trading Warren. Nice job just tossing Bender into a trade for no reason. Then I read that we should go after Marc Gasol. You guys are hilarious

[Saberestar]

Chriss OR Bender + Monroe + Mil Pick for Marc Gasol?

Booker + Warren + Marc + 18 pick would be a decent core.

Vomit-worthy to an extreme level. Not only would that team still fail to make the playoffs, but it would lead us to the late lottery land while giving up a future 1st and a player with upside in the process, while also eliminating all cap space this offseason. If yo look at the opportunity cost we have effectively traded Chriss or Bender, our cap space, a future 1st, a top 5 pick of this draft, and a max FA all for Marc Gasol, who is way too old for the rest of the team.

I'm sure that offer is vomit worthy to an even more extreme level for Grizzlies fans.

So vomit-worthy for them and vomit-worthy for us...it sounds like a fair offer to me.

[Saberestar]

Read on Twitter

[bwgood77]

Speaking of vomit....

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1647515#p61197575

[NavLDO]

OK...but I truly am curious. You were 'mum' on how you expect to able to afford a Max for Boogie...when you can't...

What 'moves' do you intend to make in order to free up room? You've got an Asik contract that is about as attractive as our Chandler contract. Ajinca isn't much better, but at least it's lower. Moore, is 'meh'...

Again, if you attempt to Max Boogie, you are sitting at $95M with just 4 players? And the rest of your contracts take you over the luxury tax total max. And that's without any draft picks...

They'll be able to keep Boogie if he intends to stay there since they have his bird rights. I think he's able to get a 30mil contract in his first year so the Pelicans will have $123 mil locked into...
Anthony Davis, Jrue Holiday, Etwaun Moore, Hill, Asik, Ajinca, Darius Miller, and Frank Jackson. They do have their 2018 1st round pick and that player (if they keep the pick) is looking at roughly another $3mil in salary. I seriously don't see why Boogie would stay here but that's just me.

I could see the Pelicans potentially trading Boogie for maybe Bradley Beal, or a wing player of that sort.

Yeah, exactly. They can sign Boogie; but then they have no money to sign anyone else, and they are far from a polished roster. I agree that if they re-sign Boogie, they will have to make some sort of move between him or AD, because no one will want to pay Jrue that much, or Hill (especially when you consider his best season last year, he avg'd 7/3.8/1.8 and he gets as much as Warren). Asik is WAY over paid, so that leaves moving Moore and Ajinca in order to gain any decent space...but that's still pushing $93M for 4 players NOT counting Asik. And they still aren't very good.

Doesn't seem like a great idea to me, to keep him, which is why I suggested the trade of Boogie + Moore + the better of their pick or our Mia pick...for...Monroe + Warren. Gets them Warren on a great contract, plus AD and Jrue. They can then try to maneuver what's left to build upon that without having to start all over.

Gets us the Center, and Star player we need, of course. I thought it was a more than fair deal, considering Boogie could leave at season's end.

[lilfishi22]

Most companies have a 5 year strategic plan and also yearly objectives which they look to meet in order to achieve the vision set out in the 5 year plan. But they don't just blindly stick to the 5 year plan. Good companies review the 5 year strategic plan every couple of years to ensure it's still fit for purpose and still relevant in the constantly changing the landscape. This is where we're at right now. We're basically two years into our 5 year strategic plan aka "the timeline" and we need to review this plan.

So what do you think that we could do that would put the Suns in contention and wouldnt hurt our future? Give up the Suns draft pick this year? and if it ends up being a top 5 pick that could give the Suns another all-star to match up with Booker. Trade JJ and in 5 years when he is the best player from this draft. How about signing a shoot first point guard like Kyrie who is only averaging 5 assists a game. No offense but there are no easy answers that we can sign or trade for a player that would give us the answer of the future. Also remember it is much harder to sign players due to the ability of teams to sign players for much higher and keep them. There are no Steve Nash's that will turn this team around out there to turn this team into a championship team.

I'm saying everything should be on the table. What if that top 5 pick ends up being a dud. What if JJ never works out his weaknesses? On the topic of Kyrie....the Celtics 23-6 and he's 2nd in the league in clutch time...

No offense but holding so much stock in all of these picks and young players and assume they'll take us to the promised land in 2020 and beyond is just as much of a potential disaster as throwing away all the picks. People look at Philly like all they did was tanked perfectly and now they have Simmons, Fultz and Embiid and forget they also whiffed on Okafor, Noel, Turner and MCW. It's taken us 4 years to realise the guy we drafted at #5 in 2013 is a dud while our two best players were drafted #13 and #14... Bender, Chriss, JJ are all up in the air and we probably will be patient and won't know what we really have until few seasons down the line. At this point, Bender and Chriss aren't exactly trending upwards and that's a scary thought. JJ has shown some flashes and has had some productive games but has largely been disappointing. Not the end of the world since he's young and we're only 30 or so games into the season but at this point you have as much evidence to say he might be the best player from this draft in 5yrs as anyone who thinks he could be the biggest bust in this draft. The reason I'm not against picking outside of the top 5 or even top 10 as a result of playing competitive basketball is because McD doesn't have a great draft record when he has a high pick anyway.

For the tankers who think doing anything that isn't tanking is 'shortsighted', think that non-tankers are advocating trading away everything just to add a few wins or that this Timeline is foolproof if we just keep sucking and keeping picking high, you're wrong.

Let's not be so blinded by this 2020 plan that McD trotted out a couple of seasons ago and think that a good plan then is still a good plan now or next season. If Booker plateaued as an inefficient 15ppg scorer who does nothing else and TJ only became a spark off the bench and nothing more (two entirely likely cases for #13 and #14 picks), then fine, keep tanking. But Booker has upped his efficiency across the board, he's rebounding better, he's making plays for his team mates and he's shown he can be a lethal 4th quarter assassin. TJ is a reliable 18ppg scorer on good efficiency (even without a 3PT shot) and much improved defense. We have two guys on this team that's ready to play competitive basketball but with team mates who aren't 2 years away from being 2 years away. Doesn't that alone prompt a review of this 2020 plan? My preference is that we start building a competitive team this offseason. If something comes along midseason that would make us competitive, let's dip into that stockpile of picks we have and get deals done. Not saying we need to trade all our assets away to try and contend but let's start building a fringe playoff team. Let's develop what we already have and let's focus on Booker.

[lilfishi22]

Why are people under the ridiculous impression that Booker is not learning and growing by playing the Harden role for us, and that we immediately have to sacrifice legitimate pieces to get a vet PG, which will somehow then make Booker grow as a player? Making life easier for a player is not necessarily making him grow or allowing him to grow. In fact, I'd argue that pushing Booker to develop his playmaking skills and on the defensive end is where he can grow the most as a player.

Even if it's not FOR Booker, we could still use a vet PG who can contribute and you know...not suck like our current current PG rotation.

[lilfishi22]

Damn, Marc Gasol is 32 years old?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

33 in Jan 18

[lilfishi22]

Damn, Marc Gasol is 32 years old?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup. This would be Tyson 2.0. Remember Tyson was something like 3rd in the NBA in win shares when we signed him, a move the "win-now" crowd lauded. Where did that get us? But yes, let's keep just repeating that draft picks aren't sure things on a repeatable loop and forget that trades and FAs are no sure things themselves, particularly aging bigs with huge amounts of minutes played throughout their careers.

This is the problem. You think any move that doesn't tread the tanking party line is a win-now move. That just isn't true.

I'm not advocating for a Gasol trade because I think he's too expensive but if he wasn't, I wouldn't be against having him on the team. He's got some miles on him but he's also just turning 33, arguably still in his prime when we're talking about bigs. He plays smart, fundamental basketball and that's an asset we could really use when we have all these young players who don't know how to play.

[AtheJ415]

Damn, Marc Gasol is 32 years old?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup. This would be Tyson 2.0. Remember Tyson was something like 3rd in the NBA in win shares when we signed him, a move the "win-now" crowd lauded. Where did that get us? But yes, let's keep just repeating that draft picks aren't sure things on a repeatable loop and forget that trades and FAs are no sure things themselves, particularly aging bigs with huge amounts of minutes played throughout their careers.

This is the problem. You think any move that doesn't tread the tanking party line is a win-now move. That just isn't true.

I'm not advocating for a Gasol trade because I think he's too expensive but if he wasn't, I wouldn't be against having him on the team. He's got some miles on him but he's also just turning 33, arguably still in his prime when we're talking about bigs. He plays smart, fundamental basketball and that's an asset we could really use when we have all these young players who don't know how to play.

No. I'm advocating against George Hill, Marc Gasol, and Mike Conley, all guys who make huge amounts of money. There is a real and very tangible opportunity cost there. By making said move for the old dude who isn't worth his contract and isn't good enough to move the needle to even make the playoffs without additional moves, you ruin the opportunity to sign somebody in the offseason, all for winning a few (not many) more games today, with the only real method of still improving at that point limited to later draft picks and trades where you will have to give up some stuff of real value. Thus, you are trading more than just the players involved. The cap is our biggest and only advantage in FA. You want to ignore that, and literally everything bolded above was said about Tyson. No, we couldn't use guys like that. We could use a Gasol at 26, not at 32. And 32 year old bigs are in their prime for maybe 1 year. Their prime is exiting any second now.

Here are some guys we could use: Aaron Gordon, Porzingis, Capela, Cousins. Those are the types of needlechanging moves we should be targetting and that make sense. They likely won't happen, but if you are patient you will eventually get an opportunity at getting a guy who fits our team's age range. I would approve of any and all of those despite it hurting the tank this year. Those are very different from the awful desired contracts some here seem to covet like George Hill, Rubio, Gasol, and Conley.

[AtheJ415]

Why are people under the ridiculous impression that Booker is not learning and growing by playing the Harden role for us, and that we immediately have to sacrifice legitimate pieces to get a vet PG, which will somehow then make Booker grow as a player? Making life easier for a player is not necessarily making him grow or allowing him to grow. In fact, I'd argue that pushing Booker to develop his playmaking skills and on the defensive end is where he can grow the most as a player.

Even if it's not FOR Booker, we could still use a vet PG who can contribute and you know...not suck like our current current PG rotation.

No. We really couldn't. Not this season. Not with who is available and the salaries they make.

[bwgood77]

Most companies have a 5 year strategic plan and also yearly objectives which they look to meet in order to achieve the vision set out in the 5 year plan. But they don't just blindly stick to the 5 year plan. Good companies review the 5 year strategic plan every couple of years to ensure it's still fit for purpose and still relevant in the constantly changing the landscape. This is where we're at right now. We're basically two years into our 5 year strategic plan aka "the timeline" and we need to review this plan.

So what do you think that we could do that would put the Suns in contention and wouldnt hurt our future? Give up the Suns draft pick this year? and if it ends up being a top 5 pick that could give the Suns another all-star to match up with Booker. Trade JJ and in 5 years when he is the best player from this draft. How about signing a shoot first point guard like Kyrie who is only averaging 5 assists a game. No offense but there are no easy answers that we can sign or trade for a player that would give us the answer of the future. Also remember it is much harder to sign players due to the ability of teams to sign players for much higher and keep them. There are no Steve Nash's that will turn this team around out there to turn this team into a championship team.

I'm saying everything should be on the table. What if that top 5 pick ends up being a dud. What if JJ never works out his weaknesses? On the topic of Kyrie....the Celtics 23-6 and he's 2nd in the league in clutch time...

No offense but holding so much stock in all of these picks and young players and assume they'll take us to the promised land in 2020 and beyond is just as much of a potential disaster as throwing away all the picks. People look at Philly like all they did was tanked perfectly and now they have Simmons, Fultz and Embiid and forget they also whiffed on Okafor, Noel, Turner and MCW. It's taken us 4 years to realise the guy we drafted at #5 in 2013 is a dud while our two best players were drafted #13 and #14... Bender, Chriss, JJ are all up in the air and we probably will be patient and won't know what we really have until few seasons down the line. At this point, Bender and Chriss aren't exactly trending upwards and that's a scary thought. JJ has shown some flashes and has had some productive games but has largely been disappointing. Not the end of the world since he's young and we're only 30 or so games into the season but at this point you have as much evidence to say he might be the best player from this draft in 5yrs as anyone who thinks he could be the biggest bust in this draft. The reason I'm not against picking outside of the top 5 or even top 10 as a result of playing competitive basketball is because McD doesn't have a great draft record when he has a high pick anyway.

For the tankers who think doing anything that isn't tanking is 'shortsighted', think that non-tankers are advocating trading away everything just to add a few wins or that this Timeline is foolproof if we just keep sucking and keeping picking high, you're wrong.

Let's not be so blinded by this 2020 plan that McD trotted out a couple of seasons ago and think that a good plan then is still a good plan now or next season. If Booker plateaued as an inefficient 15ppg scorer who does nothing else and TJ only became a spark off the bench and nothing more (two entirely likely cases for #13 and #14 picks), then fine, keep tanking. But Booker has upped his efficiency across the board, he's rebounding better, he's making plays for his team mates and he's shown he can be a lethal 4th quarter assassin. TJ is a reliable 18ppg scorer on good efficiency (even without a 3PT shot) and much improved defense. We have two guys on this team that's ready to play competitive basketball but with team mates who aren't 2 years away from being 2 years away. Doesn't that alone prompt a review of this 2020 plan? My preference is that we start building a competitive team this offseason. If something comes along midseason that would make us competitive, let's dip into that stockpile of picks we have and get deals done. Not saying we need to trade all our assets away to try and contend but let's start building a fringe playoff team. Let's develop what we already have and let's focus on Booker.

I think people who want to develop the young guys and pick through the draft are fine with trying to get competitive this off season as well. This summer we possibly flirted with adding guys (Griffin, Millsap, Irving, all of which are currently out, interestingly enough), but we decided to stick with the young guys.

No one predicted the Watson and coaching disaster though...and while some felt the Bledsoe ending would be bad, I don't think anyone expected it to go down quite that way. So the team is awful to watch due to the lack of a PG and basically the lack of anything resembling a decent head coach for the rookie year and first offseason for Bender and Chriss.

It's ugly and can be disappointing to watch, and it would be nice to have a decent vet PG who liked to pass and get others involved more but I'm not sure what's out there other than maybe George Hill. Of course if we went that route it leaves us out of FA this summer in all likelihood.

The problem with young guys under performing to an extent you want to put them on the table for trade is that it likely also means their probable trade return value is extremely low as well.

I won't be surprised if we scramble and do a trade mid season, because there is a good chance Sarver feels the same way you do and doesn't want to stand around and wait for McD's high picks not to pan out.

I definitely think our best chance to improve the team over the long term though is to keep our picks right now and use them wisely and let Booker be the leader of the guys we build beneath him.

And you made some good points about the Sixers having some bad picks...like we did with Len...just because they struck out with MCW, Noel, Okafor, an injured Embiid they didn't just throw in the towel and say "High picks suck! We can't make the right ones!" and trade them. They used them and ended up with Simmons and Fultz...and they were patient with Embiid after him showing nothing for a couple years.

I think they are glad they did keep the picks.

[Kerrsed]

Speaking of vomit....

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1647515#p61197575

What?? I didnt say i was for it, just that it could always be an option. Seems like a very Sarver thing to do, abandon the Timeline for a former star in hopes of driving ticket/jersey sales. Also think that he could talk McD into it with the link that Melo has to other star players. I mean we gave Chandler a HUGE contract to help lure in Aldridge of all people, dont act like its out of the realm for them to trade a huge expiring for Melo (Equaling Bledsoe for Melo/1st) in hopes that Booker/Melo could help lure in Lebron or others.

But also as i said in that thread, its not even worth mentioning as Melo still has his NTC and would veto any trade to us, or pretty much anywhere besides less than a handful of teams.

[NavLDO]

I don't think Ulis is our long term answer our point guard. I know we can cherry pick some games to prove he isn't all that bad, and I think he's a fine backup PG, but I hope to find a long term improvement in the draft. I don't see his defense (despite the great effort) being good enough to be a starter on hopefully a solid playoff team.

If our standard is being a better shooter than Rubio and Mudiay than that's pretty low. Hill isn't a long term answer and hasn't played particularly well, but is shooting 43.8% from 3 this year and is a solid vet and defender. Ulis is shooting 28.6% from 3 this year. Sure he's had a stretch of games shooting better. TJ Warren has shot 43% from 3 over his last 4 games, but that doesn't mean I'd consider him a good three point shooter.

I am one of those who is fine standing pat even though I wouldn't mind finding a more solid PG. The problem is I don't see any as attainable that would make much sense,

Overall I think Hill would be the type of guy that might be attainable and might make some sense to have around for a year, given our overall subpar PG situation, though he hasn't had a great year overall, but I can also understand wanting to keep our cap sheet clean too for this summer since he doesn't ultimately move the needle much, and I'm not that concerned with getting a few extra wins. As a matter of fact, when they come because of a vet that is kind of frustrating, as I'd rather any wins come on the backs of our young guys. In theory a vet PG like Hill would make them better, though Skal, Fox and some of the other young guys are not playing well for Sacramento. Hield is though.

I don't imagine us having much of a shot at Boogie or another "big name free agent" either though, but that doesn't mean it's not worth trying. There are not many big name free agents in the next two summers that I think would sign and also make a lot of sense for our team. A lot of them happen to be shooting guards, particularly in 2019.

Hopefully our biggest difference makers are people we draft this summer or guys who are already on the team.

All salient points. Ulis does not have to be our answer at PG for the future, but for this season? Why not. James has his moments, as he did last night...17/5 on 58% shooting in just 20 minutes, while Ulis struggled. It happens.

But it's obvious, they are not our answer as full time starters; at least not what I've seen, but I guess it's possible that Ulis really improves as the season pushes on.

As far as having a shot at a 'big name' FA, you are also right; probably not happening, but I think we kind of all knew this, didn't we? Even McD, which is/was the reason for asset collection, which really baffles me. Quite a few fans here want to keep drafting rookie after rookie to develop, but I personally do not see it that way. We should not be getting 'attached' to all of these guys. Some? Sure. But we have no need for two starting SFs and two Top 10 (otherwise known as 'expected starter-level) PFs.

Additionally, we have 2 picks that will likely be in the lottery (or close to lottery). One would be great to have on board, but two?

We can only start 5 players; we currently lack a PG and a C. I know you've mentioned PF as well, but realistically, I hope we give Bender or Chriss more than 2 years and to the age of 23 before we truly define them as busts.

But we have either Warren or JJ and Chriss or Bender, and on a smaller scale, Ulis and James. We also have veteran such as Chandler and Dudley, given their contracts, they aren't half bad as assets for a few teams, I bet. And then, we have 3 future 1sts that are not ours.

IMO,we should keep our pick, pick the best available Center or PG, and trade the other pick. If no Center/PG is worthy of where we pick, then trade down or pick best player available, then make best possible trade REGARDLESS of what it is...DO NOT bring a 3rd SF or PF on to this roster. Trade the player we just drafted or trade the other players we have already at the position, but we cannot leave Draft night with...

Ulis / Booker / Warren + JJ + Doncic / Bender + Chriss + Bridges / Chandler

We just sign ourselves up for this year all over again...

Anyway, spot on on a lot points your bring up, BW. But don't forget the 'trade' option, because that is likely the only way we get a Vet star here, but it's also a very realistic option, since we have the firepower to make it happen...

[bwgood77]

Speaking of vomit....

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1647515#p61197575

What?? I didnt say i was for it, just that it could always be an option. Seems like a very Sarver thing to do, abandon the Timeline for a former star in hopes of driving ticket/jersey sales. Also think that he could talk McD into it with the link that Melo has to other star players. I mean we gave Chandler a HUGE contract to help lure in Aldridge of all people, dont act like its out of the realm for them to trade a huge expiring for Melo (Equaling Bledsoe for Melo/1st) in hopes that Booker/Melo could help lure in Lebron or others.

But also as i said in that thread, its not even worth mentioning as Melo still has his NTC and would veto any trade to us, or pretty much anywhere besides less than a handful of teams.

It was just funny because out of all the big name players there are he would be the dead last player I would want, and he has shown he doesn't make teams better at this point and I saw that thread asking where he could be traded and I went in to respond and say "I can't see why anyone would want him" and the first response I see was yours, so I was

[NavLDO]

Doncic is a PG that can play SG/SF because of his size.

That's great, then. But nowhere is anyone listing him as a Point Guard, which tells me, it's not his best position. If it is, however, then sign me up. But until I see him listed as a PG, I remain skeptical. Because while I've also read he CAN play PG, that's akin to Bender being able to play SG, but you don't see him doing it because it's not his best position.

In otherwords--is he a better PG than, say, Sexton or Duval, or the other PG prospects? Like I said, if he is, then great, I'd love to draft him then. I honestly do not know; I don't watch Eurpoean basketball, and even if I did, it would still be tough to compare...

[bwgood77]

I don't think Ulis is our long term answer our point guard. I know we can cherry pick some games to prove he isn't all that bad, and I think he's a fine backup PG, but I hope to find a long term improvement in the draft. I don't see his defense (despite the great effort) being good enough to be a starter on hopefully a solid playoff team.

If our standard is being a better shooter than Rubio and Mudiay than that's pretty low. Hill isn't a long term answer and hasn't played particularly well, but is shooting 43.8% from 3 this year and is a solid vet and defender. Ulis is shooting 28.6% from 3 this year. Sure he's had a stretch of games shooting better. TJ Warren has shot 43% from 3 over his last 4 games, but that doesn't mean I'd consider him a good three point shooter.

I am one of those who is fine standing pat even though I wouldn't mind finding a more solid PG. The problem is I don't see any as attainable that would make much sense,

Overall I think Hill would be the type of guy that might be attainable and might make some sense to have around for a year, given our overall subpar PG situation, though he hasn't had a great year overall, but I can also understand wanting to keep our cap sheet clean too for this summer since he doesn't ultimately move the needle much, and I'm not that concerned with getting a few extra wins. As a matter of fact, when they come because of a vet that is kind of frustrating, as I'd rather any wins come on the backs of our young guys. In theory a vet PG like Hill would make them better, though Skal, Fox and some of the other young guys are not playing well for Sacramento. Hield is though.

I don't imagine us having much of a shot at Boogie or another "big name free agent" either though, but that doesn't mean it's not worth trying. There are not many big name free agents in the next two summers that I think would sign and also make a lot of sense for our team. A lot of them happen to be shooting guards, particularly in 2019.

Hopefully our biggest difference makers are people we draft this summer or guys who are already on the team.

All salient points. Ulis does not have to be our answer at PG for the future, but for this season? Why not. James has his moments, as he did last night...17/5 on 58% shooting in just 20 minutes, while Ulis struggled. It happens.

But it's obvious, they are not our answer as full time starters; at least not what I've seen, but I guess it's possible that Ulis really improves as the season pushes on.

As far as having a shot at a 'big name' FA, you are also right; probably not happening, but I think we kind of all knew this, didn't we? Even McD, which is/was the reason for asset collection, which really baffles me. Quite a few fans here want to keep drafting rookie after rookie to develop, but I personally do not see it that way. We should not be getting 'attached' to all of these guys. Some? Sure. But we have no need for two starting SFs and two Top 10 (otherwise known as 'expected starter-level) PFs.

Additionally, we have 2 picks that will likely be in the lottery (or close to lottery). One would be great to have on board, but two?

We can only start 5 players; we currently lack a PG and a C. I know you've mentioned PF as well, but realistically, I hope we give Bender or Chriss more than 2 years and to the age of 23 before we truly define them as busts.

But we have either Warren or JJ and Chriss or Bender, and on a smaller scale, Ulis and James. We also have veteran such as Chandler and Dudley, given their contracts, they aren't half bad as assets for a few teams, I bet. And then, we have 3 future 1sts that are not ours.

IMO,we should keep our pick, pick the best available Center or PG, and trade the other pick. If no Center/PG is worthy of where we pick, then trade down or pick best player available, then make best possible trade REGARDLESS of what it is...DO NOT bring a 3rd SF or PF on to this roster. Trade the player we just drafted or trade the other players we have already at the position, but we cannot leave Draft night with...

Ulis / Booker / Warren + JJ + Doncic / Bender + Chriss + Bridges / Chandler

We just sign ourselves up for this year all over again...

Anyway, spot on on a lot points your bring up, BW. But don't forget the 'trade' option, because that is likely the only way we get a Vet star here, but it's also a very realistic option, since we have the firepower to make it happen...

Agree with most all of that, except I've seen you post about Doncic, who I think can be a transcendent player, and that you think he may be redundant, but I don't think you should think of him as a SF or pigeon hole him into a position. Just like you saying Fultz could be expendable because Simmons is basically running point. Doncic will probably be the primary ball handler on his team but can play off ball, so I think basically having him and Booker handle those duties in the backcourt, we'd have size, but the offensive firepower and bbiq would be crazy.

I am more luckewarm on C, because I think these days there are a surplus of fairly solid centers and they are going to be running cheap because of that, due to the surplus and small ball, and you really want a rim protector and defender in the middle. Offensive centers leave it tough to lead to wins. KAT is great on offense but horrid on defense which leaves MN with problems until they added Butler but still they hover above 500 with a couple or "superstars" and another guy in Wiggins some think is a premier player (I agree with you that Warren is about as effective, or moreso depending on how you view it and is much cheaper). Vucevic is on fire in Orlando with stats but it's not leading to wins.

I will take Ayton for sure if that is BPA where we draft. The defensive centers are good too, but there is big risk if they don't pan out and don't add anything offensively.

As much as I am all vested in Jackson/Warren/Bender/Chriss, sometimes I think if Porter checks out and he is there and Doncic gone it might be tough to pass. Then again, we might not have that high of a pick and we still have a lot of the college season to go.

I think this is a draft where you have to take BPA, and since that is always not clear cut and is subjective, I think you need to do it from a "already performs at high level against top competition". We need defense, but we still need desperately to spread the floor. I love Warren but we need to spread the floor to allow guys like him and Jackson to work. A Doncic/Booker back court does that. Jackson can guard PGs if needed when he is in there with them. Hopefully they all develop 3 pt shots though and Warren, Booker and Chriss continue to develop defensively...Bender too...he has the def bbiq but just make sure he stays engaged.

[lilfishi22]

Yup. This would be Tyson 2.0. Remember Tyson was something like 3rd in the NBA in win shares when we signed him, a move the "win-now" crowd lauded. Where did that get us? But yes, let's keep just repeating that draft picks aren't sure things on a repeatable loop and forget that trades and FAs are no sure things themselves, particularly aging bigs with huge amounts of minutes played throughout their careers.

This is the problem. You think any move that doesn't tread the tanking party line is a win-now move. That just isn't true.

I'm not advocating for a Gasol trade because I think he's too expensive but if he wasn't, I wouldn't be against having him on the team. He's got some miles on him but he's also just turning 33, arguably still in his prime when we're talking about bigs. He plays smart, fundamental basketball and that's an asset we could really use when we have all these young players who don't know how to play.

No. I'm advocating against George Hill, Marc Gasol, and Mike Conley, all guys who make huge amounts of money. There is a real and very tangible opportunity cost there. By making said move for the old dude who isn't worth his contract and isn't good enough to move the needle to even make the playoffs without additional moves, you ruin the opportunity to sign somebody in the offseason, all for winning a few (not many) more games today, with the only real method of still improving at that point limited to later draft picks and trades where you will have to give up some stuff of real value. Thus, you are trading more than just the players involved. The cap is our biggest and only advantage in FA. You want to ignore that, and literally everything bolded above was said about Tyson. No, we couldn't use guys like that. We could use a Gasol at 26, not at 32. And 32 year old bigs are in their prime for maybe 1 year. Their prime is exiting any second now.

Here are some guys we could use: Aaron Gordon, Porzingis, Capela, Cousins. Those are the types of needlechanging moves we should be targetting and that make sense. They likely won't happen, but if you are patient you will eventually get an opportunity at getting a guy who fits our team's age range. I would approve of any and all of those despite it hurting the tank this year. Those are very different from the awful desired contracts some here seem to covet like George Hill, Rubio, Gasol, and Conley.

I'll just say this; I wouldn't give up much for players like Hill, Gasol or Conley. They are way too expensive for who they are. Rubio I might look at because I think he's the vet PG who could help us. I don't have any issue overpaying short term money for a vet who can get us playing the right way and make Booker and TJ better. I don't mind paying for guys like DeAndre, Rubio, Kyrie (before he was traded) short term money because we have that now and these are player who I think can help us play good basketball.

[Mulhollanddrive]

I don't think our Centers are that bad:

Per 30:
Monroe 14-10 on 120 O-Rating
Len 12-12-1 on 120 O-Rating
Chandler 8-11 on 127 O-Rating

Per 30:
Jordan 13-9-1 on 126 O-Rating
Gasol 16-7-1 on 102 O-Rating

[MilotheSlayer]

Two things I'd like to see happen before the deadline.
1. I'd like to see us figure out our center spot. Ideally for me we trade either Chandler or Monroe. I'd then like to start Len the rest of the year. Give him his time to prove himself. He's played well all year in my opinion and his simplified game has really helped him on the floor.

2. I want to see Dudley get more minutes. He always makes the extra pass and guys feed off of his energy. He's a pro's pro and a vocal leader from the bench. But I think our young guys can learn a lot from him when he is on the floor. Guys like Bender/Chriss/Jackson/Reed could all learn a few things from Dudley's game. His willingness to make the extra pass and his underrated defensive impact.

Even if one of these happens I'd be a happy man.