RealGM

Daniel Theis has agreed to sign with the New Orleans Pelicans on a one-year deal. Theis finished last season with the Los Angeles Clippers following his trade from the Indiana Pacers. In 69 games with the Clippers, Theis averaged 6.3 points, 4.1 rebounds and 1.0 assists in 16.9 minutes.

The Pelicans entered the offseason with a need at center as they had anticipated losing Jonas Valanciunas in free agency.

Theis is represented by Aaron Mintz and Steven Heumann.

Via Adrian Wojnarowski/ESPN

They had like three years to use the Lakers/Bucks picks to land Myles Turner and refused to do it. Now teams know that the "missing piece" trade will cost you 4+ firsts even if the guy is barely an All-Star.

Cassius wrote:They had like three years to use the Lakers/Bucks picks to land Myles Turner and refused to do it. Now teams know that the "missing piece" trade will cost you 4+ firsts even if the guy is barely an All-Star.

Why are you sure they didn't try?
Why are you sure that Turner is the missing link?

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Cassius wrote:They had like three years to use the Lakers/Bucks picks to land Myles Turner and refused to do it. Now teams know that the "missing piece" trade will cost you 4+ firsts even if the guy is barely an All-Star.

Why are you sure they didn't try?
Why are you sure that Turner is the missing link?

Didn’t try: The whole world saw the Russell Westbrook packages for Turner and Hield and all of them were asking for the ‘29 and ‘30 Lakers firsts. NOP could have easily beat that without even taking back Buddy.

Missing Link: It took about four games to see that Zion and Ingram are defensive turnstiles who needed a rim protector behind them, as well as reluctant shooters who prefer to attack in the paint and midrange, respectively. Turner (or any stretch 5) would have worked, without costing as much as a Zinger. There aren’t many other rim protecting stretch 5s who are still in their 20s.

Cassius wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Cassius wrote:They had like three years to use the Lakers/Bucks picks to land Myles Turner and refused to do it. Now teams know that the "missing piece" trade will cost you 4+ firsts even if the guy is barely an All-Star.

Why are you sure they didn't try?
Why are you sure that Turner is the missing link?

Didn’t try: The whole world saw the Russell Westbrook packages for Turner and Hield and all of them were asking for the ‘29 and ‘30 Lakers firsts. NOP could have easily beat that without even taking back Buddy.

Missing Link: It took about four games to see that Zion and Ingram are defensive turnstiles who needed a rim protector behind them, as well as reluctant shooters who prefer to attack in the paint and midrange, respectively. Turner (or any stretch 5) would have worked, without costing as much as a Zinger. There aren’t many other rim protecting stretch 5s who are still in their 20s.

There was a time when IND wasn't sure who to move, Turner or Sabonis. There was also concern in IND that Turner could walk for nothing because of the structure of his deal. So yes, they were listening to offers... But there was never a moment that I believed LAL could get Turner and Hield for Russ and a couple picks. That was all LAL generated noise; I doubt those talks were ever close.

I hear everything you're saying about NOP, I just believe they are (and have been) farther away than that. In reality, they might be a Zion trade away.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Cassius wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:Why are you sure they didn't try?
Why are you sure that Turner is the missing link?

Didn’t try: The whole world saw the Russell Westbrook packages for Turner and Hield and all of them were asking for the ‘29 and ‘30 Lakers firsts. NOP could have easily beat that without even taking back Buddy.

Missing Link: It took about four games to see that Zion and Ingram are defensive turnstiles who needed a rim protector behind them, as well as reluctant shooters who prefer to attack in the paint and midrange, respectively. Turner (or any stretch 5) would have worked, without costing as much as a Zinger. There aren’t many other rim protecting stretch 5s who are still in their 20s.

There was a time when IND wasn't sure who to move, Turner or Sabonis. There was also concern in IND that Turner could walk for nothing because of the structure of his deal. So yes, they were listening to offers... But there was never a moment that I believed LAL could get Turner and Hield for Russ and a couple picks. That was all LAL generated noise; I doubt those talks were ever close.

I hear everything you're saying about NOP, I just believe they are (and have been) farther away than that. In reality, they might be a Zion trade away.

Gtfoh Turner and hield for two first rd unprotected picks and westbricks expiring contract was most definitely on the table.. Indiana would of done this is a heart beat.. Now turner is on a decesending contract one of the better ones in the NBA they wouldnt but back then yes and Buddy isnt worth a first.

haste10176 wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Cassius wrote:
Didn’t try: The whole world saw the Russell Westbrook packages for Turner and Hield and all of them were asking for the ‘29 and ‘30 Lakers firsts. NOP could have easily beat that without even taking back Buddy.

Missing Link: It took about four games to see that Zion and Ingram are defensive turnstiles who needed a rim protector behind them, as well as reluctant shooters who prefer to attack in the paint and midrange, respectively. Turner (or any stretch 5) would have worked, without costing as much as a Zinger. There aren’t many other rim protecting stretch 5s who are still in their 20s.

There was a time when IND wasn't sure who to move, Turner or Sabonis. There was also concern in IND that Turner could walk for nothing because of the structure of his deal. So yes, they were listening to offers... But there was never a moment that I believed LAL could get Turner and Hield for Russ and a couple picks. That was all LAL generated noise; I doubt those talks were ever close.

I hear everything you're saying about NOP, I just believe they are (and have been) farther away than that. In reality, they might be a Zion trade away.

Gtfoh Turner and hield for two first rd unprotected picks and westbricks expiring contract was most definitely on the table.. Indiana would of done this is a heart beat.. Now turner is on a decesending contract one of the better ones in the NBA they wouldnt but back then yes and Buddy isnt worth a first.

Averages from the previous season:
Turner- 13/7 with 2.8 BLK (Lead the NBA in under 30 MPG)
Heild- 18/5/5

Turner and AD would have been a scary frontcourt and Heild is the outside shooter LAL has been constantly seeking. If they said no to this than they truly are incompetent... but I don't believe Turner was ever really on the table, not for two distant (probably late) picks and a player they would likely buyout. They weren't sure if they would be able to keep Turner because of the structure of his deal, but if they were seriously shopping him the rumors would be about more teams than LAL. If the Lakers are the only rumored destination... that's your sign.

Pickled Prunes wrote:Turner and AD would have been a scary frontcourt and Heild is the outside shooter LAL has been constantly seeking. If they said no to this than they truly are incompetent... but I don't believe Turner was ever really on the table, not for two distant (probably late) picks and a player they would likely buyout. They weren't sure if they would be able to keep Turner because of the structure of his deal, but if they were seriously shopping him the rumors would be about more teams than LAL. If the Lakers are the only rumored destination... that's your sign.

Turner has been on the block from the day that Sabonis arrived, due to the obvious fit issues. They moved Domas first but Turner was out there until he signed his extension. It's not like the Pacers had a ton of success before this year with him. It's not much different than Poeltl on the Spurs. It would have taken an overpay to get him (as it did with Jak) but for a team like the Pelicans that had basically everything else in place, it would have made sense.

Cassius wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:Turner and AD would have been a scary frontcourt and Heild is the outside shooter LAL has been constantly seeking. If they said no to this than they truly are incompetent... but I don't believe Turner was ever really on the table, not for two distant (probably late) picks and a player they would likely buyout. They weren't sure if they would be able to keep Turner because of the structure of his deal, but if they were seriously shopping him the rumors would be about more teams than LAL. If the Lakers are the only rumored destination... that's your sign.

Turner has been on the block from the day that Sabonis arrived, due to the obvious fit issues. They moved Domas first but Turner was out there until he signed his extension. It's not like the Pacers had a ton of success before this year with him. It's not much different than Poeltl on the Spurs. It would have taken an overpay to get him (as it did with Jak) but for a team like the Pelicans that had basically everything else in place, it would have made sense.

Yes, he was available to any team that wanted to make an offer IND could not refuse. Westbrook and two 1sts for Turner and Heild is easy to refuse. As I said, the biggest reason Turner was available was the uncertainty around his contract. He had one of those upside-down contracts where the can't offer as much as rival teams. They did not know they would be able to keep him. Trust me, during all that time that he was "available" IND said "no" to a lot of offers. It's not like nobody wanted him. If all they wanted was two 1sts, they could have gotten that without taking back Westbrook.

I agree that Turner would be great in NOP, but I also think it was Halliburton that unlocked him on the offensive end. I'm not sure he would be the same player in NOP.

Pickled Prunes wrote:I agree that Turner would be great in NOP, but I also think it was Halliburton that unlocked him on the offensive end. I'm not sure he would be the same player in NOP.

I’m pretty sure his pre-trade splits will bear out that he’s been the same player he is today whenever Sabonis was off the floor. The only difference between now and then is an uptick in usage and presumably, better %TS now that he's higher in the offensive pecking order. There’s also the Carlisle effect.

Cassius wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:I agree that Turner would be great in NOP, but I also think it was Halliburton that unlocked him on the offensive end. I'm not sure he would be the same player in NOP.

I’m pretty sure his pre-trade splits will bear out that he’s been the same player he is today whenever Sabonis was off the floor. The only difference between now and then is an uptick in usage and presumably, better %TS now that he's higher in the offensive pecking order. There’s also the Carlisle effect.

I think we pretty much agree that Turner is and has been great. A little light in the REB department for his size/position, but an elite defender and shot blocker.

It is because I have held him in such high regard that I never believed that LAL could get him and Heild for Russ and a couple of (probably) late 1sts. That is exactly the kind of deal that the Lakers were waiting for and never materialized. LAL would have jumped on this. They ended up giving up a 1st and a 2nd for Dlo, Vanderbilt and Beasley (on that nasty contract.)

The reason I don't believe Turner is the missing link in NOP has nothing to do with Turner. Zion is a huge question mark. How about Zion for Turner and McConnell?

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Cassius wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:I agree that Turner would be great in NOP, but I also think it was Halliburton that unlocked him on the offensive end. I'm not sure he would be the same player in NOP.

I’m pretty sure his pre-trade splits will bear out that he’s been the same player he is today whenever Sabonis was off the floor. The only difference between now and then is an uptick in usage and presumably, better %TS now that he's higher in the offensive pecking order. There’s also the Carlisle effect.

I think we pretty much agree that Turner is and has been great. A little light in the REB department for his size/position, but an elite defender and shot blocker.

It is because I have held him in such high regard that I never believed that LAL could get him and Heild for Russ and a couple of (probably) late 1sts. That is exactly the kind of deal that the Lakers were waiting for and never materialized. LAL would have jumped on this. They ended up giving up a 1st and a 2nd for Dlo, Vanderbilt and Beasley (on that nasty contract.)

The reason I don't believe Turner is the missing link in NOP has nothing to do with Turner. Zion is a huge question mark. How about Zion for Turner and McConnell?

The Lakers wouldn’t trade both firsts. That’s why the deal never got done, so they pivoted to the trade above to hold onto one of them. It’s like Ainge going public with “we offered X for Jimmy/Kawhi/PG” but behind closed doors they never did.

And yeah, Zion is a question mark, but he’s basically the answer to his own question: If healthy, he can carry a team. The Pelicans just need more spacing and more rim protection.

Cassius wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Cassius wrote:
I’m pretty sure his pre-trade splits will bear out that he’s been the same player he is today whenever Sabonis was off the floor. The only difference between now and then is an uptick in usage and presumably, better %TS now that he's higher in the offensive pecking order. There’s also the Carlisle effect.

I think we pretty much agree that Turner is and has been great. A little light in the REB department for his size/position, but an elite defender and shot blocker.

It is because I have held him in such high regard that I never believed that LAL could get him and Heild for Russ and a couple of (probably) late 1sts. That is exactly the kind of deal that the Lakers were waiting for and never materialized. LAL would have jumped on this. They ended up giving up a 1st and a 2nd for Dlo, Vanderbilt and Beasley (on that nasty contract.)

The reason I don't believe Turner is the missing link in NOP has nothing to do with Turner. Zion is a huge question mark. How about Zion for Turner and McConnell?

The Lakers wouldn’t trade both firsts. That’s why the deal never got done, so they pivoted to the trade above to hold onto one of them. It’s like Ainge going public with “we offered X for Jimmy/Kawhi/PG” but behind closed doors they never did.

And yeah, Zion is a question mark, but he’s basically the answer to his own question: If healthy, he can carry a team. The Pelicans just need more spacing and more rim protection.

Yeah, I don't believe the rumors around that trade. The Lakers would have jumped at that and IND would never have taken it. It was always going to cost LAL one 1st just to get a team to take Westbrook's $47m. There is no reason that IND would sell that low on Turner. LAL might not have offered both picks, but IND would also have said no if both picks were offered. Either way, LAL didn't have enough to ever get that done. It was a Laker fan pipe dream... we get exactly what we need and IND gets Westbrook. It was never going to happen.

Zion was far less dominant last season and has missed over half of his team's games since he entered the league. He appeared to be avoiding jumping as a means of staying healthy, which almost worked. But his best attributes are size and vertical leap. He doesn't have the length or shooting ability to play with his feet planted ala Embiid. His options are: 1) Stay at ground level and be less effective. 2) Play his game and watch from the bench.

Yeah, we probably need to disagree at this point. In 2022, both Turner and Hield had one additional year left on their contracts and the Pacers were looking like they were going to rebuild on the fly. Getting Lakers picks in 29 and 30 when and AD and Bron would both be (presumably) gone is very enticing. Russ’ expiring would have given Indiana plenty of cap room to sign someone or absorb money and picks.

In any event, my point wasn’t really about the Lakers. The Pelicans were asset-rich at a time when Turner’s play made him a reasonably gettable asset, especially before the Pacers moved Sabonis. The opportunity cost of not getting a rim-protecting floor-spacer next to Zion is more than the actual cost of the surplus draft assets they had at the time.