RealGM

A little over five weeks away.

This is going to feel like an eternity.

Awesome, I'm glad it's the day of my final exam rather than the day or two before.

I think we should try to make a big play to trade for the 4th or 6th pick. Maybe the Knicks are stupid enough to want Al. Throw Al, Lance, and our pick at them and see what happens.

Braggins wrote:I think we should try to make a big play to trade for the 4th or 6th pick. Maybe the Knicks are stupid enough to want Al. Throw Al, Lance, and our pick at them and see what happens.

Unless Russell is there I don't want to give up the assets it would take to trade up to 4. If Russell is there though I'd trade the Knicks our 9th, an unprotected 2016 1st, and Lance for Calderon and the fourth.

yea i wouldn't trade up unless its for Russell.

i hope we dont trade the pick for some non-difference making veteran.

Trade up for Mudiay at #4. Trade Kemba, Biz, and our #9. Cody or Vonleh is gonna be turned into a C. Try to pry Hardaway Jr from them while we're at it.

Actually if Russell is on the board at 4 I'd send them Kemba, 9, and an unprotected 2016 1st.

Mudiay doesn't solve any of our roster fit problems and would probably make them worse, so no thanks to trading up for him.

More realistically, I hope we are able to bring all four wing prospects in our range in for a workout - Hezonja, Booker, Johnson, and Oubre. And if we really are moving on from Biz - WCS and Turner.

JDR720 wrote:yea i wouldn't trade up unless its for Russell.

i hope we dont trade the pick for some non-difference making veteran.

Agree on not trading for a marginal veteran. However, I would love to include the pick in a significant deal that also sends one of Al or Lance out, in exchange for a quality starter who has lots of tread on the tires. Unfortunately they will not deal Al.

I always enjoy getting feedback on the workouts, from our team and others. If we use the pick, I do not want us to reach for a position. Also no need to do BPA if we are overloaded at that position. Find the best player that is a quality talent, who we feel can really help this team.

Yeah, I specifically want us to trade for Russell at 4 or Hezonja at 6.

Braggins wrote:Yeah, I specifically want us to trade for Russell at 4 or Hezonja at 6.

Russell is a pipe dream. The Sixers already said that they wanted him if they had pick #1 and they ended up with #3. Trading up for Hezonja might be possible but I think he'll fall to us at #9 anyway.

catch20two wrote:

Braggins wrote:Yeah, I specifically want us to trade for Russell at 4 or Hezonja at 6.

Russell is a pipe dream. The Sixers already said that they wanted him if they had pick #1 and they ended up with #3. Trading up for Hezonja might be possible but I think he'll fall to us at #9 anyway.

Dream scenario for this off-season is Hezonja falling to 9 and Al retiring to pursue a career in competitive eating.

Trading up isn't going to happen IMHO. The team is looking to win now while keeping a foundation in place for long term sustainable success. They aren't going to want to trade a current asset for a future one at this point. We may disagree, but they've been really clear on their stance.

Trading down is possible but unlikely. The only way I see that happening is if there is a small trade that Cho thinks really helps the team like the Mo trade last year or the Neal trade the year before. In any event if they trade back it's going to be because of the player involved.

Just picking at 9 or completely trading the pick for a player are the most likely options IMHO.

So how far up could you get with a package of 9, Lance, and Marv? Do the Knicks think about it? Does Sacramento like it because they get Lance?

Is it even worth it? Is a guy up there worth it? Does say a guy like Winslow minus those guys help us more than say Booker or Johnson?

EwingSweatsALot wrote:So how far up could you get with a package of 9, Lance, and Marv? Do the Knicks think about it? Does Sacramento like it because they get Lance?

Is it even worth it? Is a guy up there worth it? Does say a guy like Winslow minus those guys help us more than say Booker or Johnson?

I dont think so, Winslow is a good player but he isn't a good shooter from anywhere besides the left side of the court which is where Okafor posts up the most i would guess.

The Knicks will likely want too much to move into 4th, given that seems to be the edge of the top tier. Orlando and Sacramento make sense as trade targets IMO. Both teams need a big man, and a couple of Porzingis, WCS, Kaminsky, and Turner will still be around at 9. In fact, the teams immediately behind them are all more likely to take a wing.

Then again Orlando may move Gordon back to the 4, at which point maybe they take a wing, doubt it though. Sacramento also needs a PG, and there isn't one at 6 that won't be there at 9 (or later I suppose). Not sure what they'd want to move up, but it makes a lot of sense to me.

Another intriguing possibility would be if these two teams take bigs at their original slots (after the consensus top 4 are gone), especially if the Pistons really like Johnson as much as rumored.

5. Magic: Porzingis
6. Kings: WCS
7. Nuggets: Winslow/Hezonja
8. Pistons: Johnson
9. Hornets: Winslow/Hezonja

JDR720 wrote:

EwingSweatsALot wrote:So how far up could you get with a package of 9, Lance, and Marv? Do the Knicks think about it? Does Sacramento like it because they get Lance?

Is it even worth it? Is a guy up there worth it? Does say a guy like Winslow minus those guys help us more than say Booker or Johnson?

I dont think so, Winslow is a good player but he isn't a good shooter from anywhere besides the left side of the court which is where Okafor posts up the most i would guess.

I disagree. Booker's defense is a big question mark - he might not be a liability from a size perspective but he doesn't have the size or athleticism that Winslow does.

I think it's a little premature to focus on shot selection from a one and done type candidate. When he has a 40% 3PT% on decent volume as a freshman I think that just shows that he has clear potential for perimeter shooting.

I will admit that my optimism about Winslow might just be me being a Duke homer, but he was by far the most important player for Duke on both offense and defense the last 1/3 of their season. He carried them at times on both ends in crucial situations. He is a winner.

yosemiteben wrote:

JDR720 wrote:

EwingSweatsALot wrote:So how far up could you get with a package of 9, Lance, and Marv? Do the Knicks think about it? Does Sacramento like it because they get Lance?

Is it even worth it? Is a guy up there worth it? Does say a guy like Winslow minus those guys help us more than say Booker or Johnson?

I dont think so, Winslow is a good player but he isn't a good shooter from anywhere besides the left side of the court which is where Okafor posts up the most i would guess.

I disagree. Booker's defense is a big question mark - he might not be a liability from a size perspective but he doesn't have the size or athleticism that Winslow does.

I think it's a little premature to focus on shot selection from a one and done type candidate. When he has a 40% 3PT% on decent volume as a freshman I think that just shows that he has clear potential for perimeter shooting.

I will admit that my optimism about Winslow might just be me being a Duke homer, but he was by far the most important player for Duke on both offense and defense the last 1/3 of their season. He carried them at times on both ends in crucial situations. He is a winner.

oh yea Winslow is better than Booker, its super close between Winslow and Johnson though but i would give the edge to Johnson because im more confident in his shooting.

Im not sold that Winslow will be a good NBA shooter. its very odd that he shot poorly on the FT line, horrible from midrange and below 30% from 3 from everywhere besides the left corner/elbow area where he shot over 50%. I just cant help but think Dukes system or teams needing to double/triple team Okafor had something to do with the inflated percentages in those 2 areas of the court.

Fair points. Agreed that his FT% is troubling.

Are we going to do that thing again this year where we vote pick-by-pick?

W_HAMILTON wrote:Are we going to do that thing again this year where we vote pick-by-pick?

The RGM Hornets Board Big Board?

Absolutely!!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums