Kemba Walker still not bought out by Detroit. Something in the works???

[Uncle Mxy]

Westbrook will perform similarly to how he did for the Wizards for whoever his next team is. He's got a motor that I wished every NBA player had. He'd be absolutely punishing off the bench.

Assuming he’d be good with coming off the bench. Westbrook playing for Detroit feels like Iverson playing for Detroit. Great idea in theory, but not a good fit in reality.

Also I don’t see him trying to be the primary facilitator for the Pistons help’s Cunningham be the primary facilitator for the Pistons.

AI fell off a cliff when we traded for him. Westbrook's already fallen off that cliff, and there may be something in the tank for revenge. No one was thinking that AI, fresh off a relatively efficient 26 ppg/7 apg and leading the league in minutes was coming off our bench when we got him. He was "let's see what a season of prime AI is like, and if it fails, we swing big in free agency".

I like the idea of a seasoned star with an ax to grind being the third guard in a 3-guard rotation, be it Kemba Walker (to bring this thread back full circle) or Westbrook. I want Cunningham and Ivey to be challenged and to develop. I don't see that happening with Cojo or Hayes.

[Southern Piston]

I agree with that, our guards could be probably use a year of Westbrook around, it’s not gonna hurt them, especially if we got some extra picks. But I’m not going out of my way to make the deal.

[jaredtyshaf]

Russell is a team chemistry killer, no thanks! I’d rather keep Kemba if having a veteran with a chip on their shoulder is the goal to compete with our youngsters.

[BIG BEN'S FRO]

Well here is the benefit. If you do the trade, notch the picks, and then Westbrook is bad for chemistry. You buy him out. Keep the picks, get the cap space back next year, send the message to the team that you play like a team or you are out.

I would want that laker pick with no protections.

[Spider156]

Westbrook will perform similarly to how he did for the Wizards for whoever his next team is. He's got a motor that I wished every NBA player had. He'd be absolutely punishing off the bench.

Assuming he’d be good with coming off the bench. Westbrook playing for Detroit feels like Iverson playing for Detroit. Great idea in theory, but not a good fit in reality.

Also I don’t see him trying to be the primary facilitator for the Pistons help’s Cunningham be the primary facilitator for the Pistons.

AI fell off a cliff when we traded for him. Westbrook's already fallen off that cliff, and there may be something in the tank for revenge. No one was thinking that AI, fresh off a relatively efficient 26 ppg/7 apg and leading the league in minutes was coming off our bench when we got him. He was "let's see what a season of prime AI is like, and if it fails, we swing big in free agency".

I like the idea of a seasoned star with an ax to grind being the third guard in a 3-guard rotation, be it Kemba Walker (to bring this thread back full circle) or Westbrook. I want Cunningham and Ivey to be challenged and to develop. I don't see that happening with Cojo or Hayes.

The problem with the Lakers was solely because Westbrook did not fit with Lebron and Davis because he turned the ball over a lot and isn’t a shooter. In addition, he refused to come off the bench and take a lesser role. It’s what got the coach fired. So if we take Westbrook it would be for 1 first round pick and match salaries, we can take 10m so add in Noel, Olynyk, Joseph. Westbrook first of all will want to start. Does it matter? No, he should because he’ll be better than he is on the Lakers simply because of expectations. Now he’s an expiring so it’s a good deal! It’ll HAVE to mean that he starts next to Cade which makes absolute sense because he’s basically 15 years older version of Ivey washed up past his prime. Even if it’s for half a season, Ivey coming off the bench could be tremendous for his development the first year, it’s the risk that we have to take. Westbrook starting means he will command a high volume of shots which we should agree to because 1. He also rebounds and 2. Passes the ball. He does turn it over but so will Cade and Ivey so that’s redundant. He will teach Ivey his methods and really take the heat off Cade for whatever that’s worth. Trade Olynyk and Noel also means opening up mins for Duren at C to start right away. If the right deal is offered, Westbrook is a good trade but the truth is, we don’t need him or the future late FRP. The trick here is if we trade for him and by the trade deadline find a contender that’ll take him for a young player or a pick. By the trade deadline Westbrook will only be owed like ~25m. Also this trade makes more sense if Lakers give us 10m in cash.

[chrbal]

Assuming he’d be good with coming off the bench. Westbrook playing for Detroit feels like Iverson playing for Detroit. Great idea in theory, but not a good fit in reality.

Also I don’t see him trying to be the primary facilitator for the Pistons help’s Cunningham be the primary facilitator for the Pistons.

AI fell off a cliff when we traded for him. Westbrook's already fallen off that cliff, and there may be something in the tank for revenge. No one was thinking that AI, fresh off a relatively efficient 26 ppg/7 apg and leading the league in minutes was coming off our bench when we got him. He was "let's see what a season of prime AI is like, and if it fails, we swing big in free agency".

I like the idea of a seasoned star with an ax to grind being the third guard in a 3-guard rotation, be it Kemba Walker (to bring this thread back full circle) or Westbrook. I want Cunningham and Ivey to be challenged and to develop. I don't see that happening with Cojo or Hayes.

The problem with the Lakers was solely because Westbrook did not fit with Lebron and Davis because he turned the ball over a lot and isn’t a shooter. In addition, he refused to come off the bench and take a lesser role. It’s what got the coach fired. So if we take Westbrook it would be for 1 first round pick and match salaries, we can take 10m so add in Noel, Olynyk, Joseph. Westbrook first of all will want to start. Does it matter? No, he should because he’ll be better than he is on the Lakers simply because of expectations. Now he’s an expiring so it’s a good deal! It’ll HAVE to mean that he starts next to Cade which makes absolute sense because he’s basically 15 years older version of Ivey washed up past his prime. Even if it’s for half a season, Ivey coming off the bench could be tremendous for his development the first year, it’s the risk that we have to take. Westbrook starting means he will command a high volume of shots which we should agree to because 1. He also rebounds and 2. Passes the ball. He does turn it over but so will Cade and Ivey so that’s redundant. He will teach Ivey his methods and really take the heat off Cade for whatever that’s worth. Trade Olynyk and Noel also means opening up mins for Duren at C to start right away. If the right deal is offered, Westbrook is a good trade but the truth is, we don’t need him or the future late FRP. The trick here is if we trade for him and by the trade deadline find a contender that’ll take him for a young player or a pick. By the trade deadline Westbrook will only be owed like ~25m. Also this trade makes more sense if Lakers give us 10m in cash.

They can’t give $10 million, also we can’t accept it because we took back the maximum amount allowed to get Walker/Duren.

Since the Thunder traded him for Chris Paul, name the player he’s made better.

I don’t mind, don’t think it’s realistic though, trading whatever for Westbrook and a pair of unprotected firsts. I do mind drafting a guy 5th overall in the 3rd year of a rebuild and then acquiring a player described as “recently fallen off a cliff” as an odd way to develop young talent.

Let’s be honest, Westbrook is not coming here at 33 in a contract year to come off the bench. So he’d have to start. Which is taking the ball out of Cades hands and pushing Ivey to the bench.

I also don’t understand how it’s good for Iveys development to come off the bench for awhile, but throw Duren right into the starting lineup.

If we do my best case if we get Westbrook and buy him out. You’re still on the books for like $40 million and you have to sign 3 players to add to the bench. Unless you’re getting guaranteed unprotected firsts (2 maybe 3), it’s not a trade worth doing.

[MotownMadness]

Assuming he’d be good with coming off the bench. Westbrook playing for Detroit feels like Iverson playing for Detroit. Great idea in theory, but not a good fit in reality.

Also I don’t see him trying to be the primary facilitator for the Pistons help’s Cunningham be the primary facilitator for the Pistons.

AI fell off a cliff when we traded for him. Westbrook's already fallen off that cliff, and there may be something in the tank for revenge. No one was thinking that AI, fresh off a relatively efficient 26 ppg/7 apg and leading the league in minutes was coming off our bench when we got him. He was "let's see what a season of prime AI is like, and if it fails, we swing big in free agency".

I like the idea of a seasoned star with an ax to grind being the third guard in a 3-guard rotation, be it Kemba Walker (to bring this thread back full circle) or Westbrook. I want Cunningham and Ivey to be challenged and to develop. I don't see that happening with Cojo or Hayes.

The problem with the Lakers was solely because Westbrook did not fit with Lebron and Davis because he turned the ball over a lot and isn’t a shooter. In addition, he refused to come off the bench and take a lesser role. It’s what got the coach fired. So if we take Westbrook it would be for 1 first round pick and match salaries, we can take 10m so add in Noel, Olynyk, Joseph. Westbrook first of all will want to start. Does it matter? No, he should because he’ll be better than he is on the Lakers simply because of expectations. Now he’s an expiring so it’s a good deal! It’ll HAVE to mean that he starts next to Cade which makes absolute sense because he’s basically 15 years older version of Ivey washed up past his prime. Even if it’s for half a season, Ivey coming off the bench could be tremendous for his development the first year, it’s the risk that we have to take. Westbrook starting means he will command a high volume of shots which we should agree to because 1. He also rebounds and 2. Passes the ball. He does turn it over but so will Cade and Ivey so that’s redundant. He will teach Ivey his methods and really take the heat off Cade for whatever that’s worth. Trade Olynyk and Noel also means opening up mins for Duren at C to start right away. If the right deal is offered, Westbrook is a good trade but the truth is, we don’t need him or the future late FRP. The trick here is if we trade for him and by the trade deadline find a contender that’ll take him for a young player or a pick. By the trade deadline Westbrook will only be owed like ~25m. Also this trade makes more sense if Lakers give us 10m in cash.

Watching a washed up WestBrook take Ivey's place in the starting lineup makes me want to throw up thinking about it.

[Invictus88]

AI fell off a cliff when we traded for him. Westbrook's already fallen off that cliff, and there may be something in the tank for revenge. No one was thinking that AI, fresh off a relatively efficient 26 ppg/7 apg and leading the league in minutes was coming off our bench when we got him. He was "let's see what a season of prime AI is like, and if it fails, we swing big in free agency".

I like the idea of a seasoned star with an ax to grind being the third guard in a 3-guard rotation, be it Kemba Walker (to bring this thread back full circle) or Westbrook. I want Cunningham and Ivey to be challenged and to develop. I don't see that happening with Cojo or Hayes.

The problem with the Lakers was solely because Westbrook did not fit with Lebron and Davis because he turned the ball over a lot and isn’t a shooter. In addition, he refused to come off the bench and take a lesser role. It’s what got the coach fired. So if we take Westbrook it would be for 1 first round pick and match salaries, we can take 10m so add in Noel, Olynyk, Joseph. Westbrook first of all will want to start. Does it matter? No, he should because he’ll be better than he is on the Lakers simply because of expectations. Now he’s an expiring so it’s a good deal! It’ll HAVE to mean that he starts next to Cade which makes absolute sense because he’s basically 15 years older version of Ivey washed up past his prime. Even if it’s for half a season, Ivey coming off the bench could be tremendous for his development the first year, it’s the risk that we have to take. Westbrook starting means he will command a high volume of shots which we should agree to because 1. He also rebounds and 2. Passes the ball. He does turn it over but so will Cade and Ivey so that’s redundant. He will teach Ivey his methods and really take the heat off Cade for whatever that’s worth. Trade Olynyk and Noel also means opening up mins for Duren at C to start right away. If the right deal is offered, Westbrook is a good trade but the truth is, we don’t need him or the future late FRP. The trick here is if we trade for him and by the trade deadline find a contender that’ll take him for a young player or a pick. By the trade deadline Westbrook will only be owed like ~25m. Also this trade makes more sense if Lakers give us 10m in cash.

They can’t give $10 million, also we can’t accept it because we took back the maximum amount allowed to get Walker/Duren.

Since the Thunder traded him for Chris Paul, name the player he’s made better.

I don’t mind, don’t think it’s realistic though, trading whatever for Westbrook and a pair of unprotected firsts. I do mind drafting a guy 5th overall in the 3rd year of a rebuild and then acquiring a player described as “recently fallen off a cliff” as an odd way to develop young talent.

Let’s be honest, Westbrook is not coming here at 33 in a contract year to come off the bench. So he’d have to start. Which is taking the ball out of Cades hands and pushing Ivey to the bench.

I also don’t understand how it’s good for Iveys development to come off the bench for awhile, but throw Duren right into the starting lineup.

If we do my best case if we get Westbrook and buy him out. You’re still on the books for like $40 million and you have to sign 3 players to add to the bench.

I think that so little thought was put into the post you are replying to that it's really not worth your time to try and bring reason to the discussion. Noble effort though

[chrbal]

The problem with the Lakers was solely because Westbrook did not fit with Lebron and Davis because he turned the ball over a lot and isn’t a shooter. In addition, he refused to come off the bench and take a lesser role. It’s what got the coach fired. So if we take Westbrook it would be for 1 first round pick and match salaries, we can take 10m so add in Noel, Olynyk, Joseph. Westbrook first of all will want to start. Does it matter? No, he should because he’ll be better than he is on the Lakers simply because of expectations. Now he’s an expiring so it’s a good deal! It’ll HAVE to mean that he starts next to Cade which makes absolute sense because he’s basically 15 years older version of Ivey washed up past his prime. Even if it’s for half a season, Ivey coming off the bench could be tremendous for his development the first year, it’s the risk that we have to take. Westbrook starting means he will command a high volume of shots which we should agree to because 1. He also rebounds and 2. Passes the ball. He does turn it over but so will Cade and Ivey so that’s redundant. He will teach Ivey his methods and really take the heat off Cade for whatever that’s worth. Trade Olynyk and Noel also means opening up mins for Duren at C to start right away. If the right deal is offered, Westbrook is a good trade but the truth is, we don’t need him or the future late FRP. The trick here is if we trade for him and by the trade deadline find a contender that’ll take him for a young player or a pick. By the trade deadline Westbrook will only be owed like ~25m. Also this trade makes more sense if Lakers give us 10m in cash.

They can’t give $10 million, also we can’t accept it because we took back the maximum amount allowed to get Walker/Duren.

Since the Thunder traded him for Chris Paul, name the player he’s made better.

I don’t mind, don’t think it’s realistic though, trading whatever for Westbrook and a pair of unprotected firsts. I do mind drafting a guy 5th overall in the 3rd year of a rebuild and then acquiring a player described as “recently fallen off a cliff” as an odd way to develop young talent.

Let’s be honest, Westbrook is not coming here at 33 in a contract year to come off the bench. So he’d have to start. Which is taking the ball out of Cades hands and pushing Ivey to the bench.

I also don’t understand how it’s good for Iveys development to come off the bench for awhile, but throw Duren right into the starting lineup.

If we do my best case if we get Westbrook and buy him out. You’re still on the books for like $40 million and you have to sign 3 players to add to the bench.

I think so little thought was put into the post you are replying to that it's really not worth your time to try and bring reason to the discussion. Noble effort though

I’ve always been a little convinced Detroit Pistons interns read this page. I like to try and shut down all bad ideas. Not always effective, but if I can stop this team from one bad move that I’ll never find out about..it’s worth it.

[Uncle Mxy]

Personally, I think Westbrook is a fantasy trade with fantasy risks. But, Kemba we have here and now. If Kemba wants to be here, I'd rather keep him around than Cojo.

[Spider156]

AI fell off a cliff when we traded for him. Westbrook's already fallen off that cliff, and there may be something in the tank for revenge. No one was thinking that AI, fresh off a relatively efficient 26 ppg/7 apg and leading the league in minutes was coming off our bench when we got him. He was "let's see what a season of prime AI is like, and if it fails, we swing big in free agency".

I like the idea of a seasoned star with an ax to grind being the third guard in a 3-guard rotation, be it Kemba Walker (to bring this thread back full circle) or Westbrook. I want Cunningham and Ivey to be challenged and to develop. I don't see that happening with Cojo or Hayes.

The problem with the Lakers was solely because Westbrook did not fit with Lebron and Davis because he turned the ball over a lot and isn’t a shooter. In addition, he refused to come off the bench and take a lesser role. It’s what got the coach fired. So if we take Westbrook it would be for 1 first round pick and match salaries, we can take 10m so add in Noel, Olynyk, Joseph. Westbrook first of all will want to start. Does it matter? No, he should because he’ll be better than he is on the Lakers simply because of expectations. Now he’s an expiring so it’s a good deal! It’ll HAVE to mean that he starts next to Cade which makes absolute sense because he’s basically 15 years older version of Ivey washed up past his prime. Even if it’s for half a season, Ivey coming off the bench could be tremendous for his development the first year, it’s the risk that we have to take. Westbrook starting means he will command a high volume of shots which we should agree to because 1. He also rebounds and 2. Passes the ball. He does turn it over but so will Cade and Ivey so that’s redundant. He will teach Ivey his methods and really take the heat off Cade for whatever that’s worth. Trade Olynyk and Noel also means opening up mins for Duren at C to start right away. If the right deal is offered, Westbrook is a good trade but the truth is, we don’t need him or the future late FRP. The trick here is if we trade for him and by the trade deadline find a contender that’ll take him for a young player or a pick. By the trade deadline Westbrook will only be owed like ~25m. Also this trade makes more sense if Lakers give us 10m in cash.

They can’t give $10 million, also we can’t accept it because we took back the maximum amount allowed to get Walker/Duren.

Since the Thunder traded him for Chris Paul, name the player he’s made better.

I don’t mind, don’t think it’s realistic though, trading whatever for Westbrook and a pair of unprotected firsts. I do mind drafting a guy 5th overall in the 3rd year of a rebuild and then acquiring a player described as “recently fallen off a cliff” as an odd way to develop young talent.

Let’s be honest, Westbrook is not coming here at 33 in a contract year to come off the bench. So he’d have to start. Which is taking the ball out of Cades hands and pushing Ivey to the bench.

I also don’t understand how it’s good for Iveys development to come off the bench for awhile, but throw Duren right into the starting lineup.

If we do my best case if we get Westbrook and buy him out. You’re still on the books for like $40 million and you have to sign 3 players to add to the bench. Unless you’re getting guaranteed unprotected firsts (2 maybe 3), it’s not a trade worth doing.

It’s a bad trade. By no means do I want Westbrook. I never suggested the trade. I’m talking about how it would work if we do make a trade for him. Personally I wanna see what Killian does off the bench first and if he sucks we can either trade him or sign a Ricky Rubio next summer or Ramon Rondo. Veteran worth the MLE first PG off the bench. Westbrook is stupid to trade for and I would never want him unless we get 2 FRPs which we won’t. That was my point. The reason you’d have to start Duren is because we’d be thin up front if we’re giving Olynyk and Noel. Also I believe Ivey is immediately ready to start from day one. The way him coming off the bench helps is he takes all the shots but there’s plenty for him in the starting lineup without Westbrook of course.

[Spider156]

Personally, I think Westbrook is a fantasy trade with fantasy risks. But, Kemba we have here and now. If Kemba wants to be here, I'd rather keep him around than Cojo.

I’d rather keep Cojo. Walker isn’t a bad role model I guess but Joseph has a voice on the team that’s too professional. I’m pretty sure Joseph’s role is bigger than being on a 10 man rotation. It’s like how McCollum is so much bigger than himself as a player. He’s successful as a leader and I can argue he turned the Pelicans around to playing hard defense and contending. Even Zion signed a get paid to play type of max contract and he’s not a headache anymore. That McCollum trade was nice! I’m not comparing Joseph to McCollum but remember McCollum is leader of the players in the league. My point is Joseph’s chemistry and professionalism at this point makes him more valuable to keep for one more year to be a third or fourth string PG than to get a washed up player like Walker for a chance to get a late FRP or just a second round pick. Of course there’s a chance Killian gets injured and Walker takes over off the bench and skyrockets his value. We’ve got quite a strong second unit for Walker to lead specially with a New York chemistry with Burks and Noel.

[Manocad]

The problem with the Lakers was solely because Westbrook did not fit with Lebron and Davis because he turned the ball over a lot and isn’t a shooter. In addition, he refused to come off the bench and take a lesser role. It’s what got the coach fired. So if we take Westbrook it would be for 1 first round pick and match salaries, we can take 10m so add in Noel, Olynyk, Joseph. Westbrook first of all will want to start. Does it matter? No, he should because he’ll be better than he is on the Lakers simply because of expectations. Now he’s an expiring so it’s a good deal! It’ll HAVE to mean that he starts next to Cade which makes absolute sense because he’s basically 15 years older version of Ivey washed up past his prime. Even if it’s for half a season, Ivey coming off the bench could be tremendous for his development the first year, it’s the risk that we have to take. Westbrook starting means he will command a high volume of shots which we should agree to because 1. He also rebounds and 2. Passes the ball. He does turn it over but so will Cade and Ivey so that’s redundant. He will teach Ivey his methods and really take the heat off Cade for whatever that’s worth. Trade Olynyk and Noel also means opening up mins for Duren at C to start right away. If the right deal is offered, Westbrook is a good trade but the truth is, we don’t need him or the future late FRP. The trick here is if we trade for him and by the trade deadline find a contender that’ll take him for a young player or a pick. By the trade deadline Westbrook will only be owed like ~25m. Also this trade makes more sense if Lakers give us 10m in cash.

They can’t give $10 million, also we can’t accept it because we took back the maximum amount allowed to get Walker/Duren.

Since the Thunder traded him for Chris Paul, name the player he’s made better.

I don’t mind, don’t think it’s realistic though, trading whatever for Westbrook and a pair of unprotected firsts. I do mind drafting a guy 5th overall in the 3rd year of a rebuild and then acquiring a player described as “recently fallen off a cliff” as an odd way to develop young talent.

Let’s be honest, Westbrook is not coming here at 33 in a contract year to come off the bench. So he’d have to start. Which is taking the ball out of Cades hands and pushing Ivey to the bench.

I also don’t understand how it’s good for Iveys development to come off the bench for awhile, but throw Duren right into the starting lineup.

If we do my best case if we get Westbrook and buy him out. You’re still on the books for like $40 million and you have to sign 3 players to add to the bench. Unless you’re getting guaranteed unprotected firsts (2 maybe 3), it’s not a trade worth doing.

It’s a bad trade. By no means do I want Westbrook. I never suggested the trade. I’m talking about how it would work if we do make a trade for him. Personally I wanna see what Killian does off the bench first and if he sucks we can either trade him or sign a Ricky Rubio next summer or Ramon Rondo. Veteran worth the MLE first PG off the bench. Westbrook is stupid to trade for and I would never want him unless we get 2 FRPs which we won’t. That was my point. The reason you’d have to start Duren is because we’d be thin up front if we’re giving Olynyk and Noel. Also I believe Ivey is immediately ready to start from day one. The way him coming off the bench helps is he takes all the shots but there’s plenty for him in the starting lineup without Westbrook of course.

Sure, if the trade didn't come with 2 FRP's I don't think anyone would argue that it wasn't a bad trade. But that's what was presented, realistic or not.

[chrbal]

The problem with the Lakers was solely because Westbrook did not fit with Lebron and Davis because he turned the ball over a lot and isn’t a shooter. In addition, he refused to come off the bench and take a lesser role. It’s what got the coach fired. So if we take Westbrook it would be for 1 first round pick and match salaries, we can take 10m so add in Noel, Olynyk, Joseph. Westbrook first of all will want to start. Does it matter? No, he should because he’ll be better than he is on the Lakers simply because of expectations. Now he’s an expiring so it’s a good deal! It’ll HAVE to mean that he starts next to Cade which makes absolute sense because he’s basically 15 years older version of Ivey washed up past his prime. Even if it’s for half a season, Ivey coming off the bench could be tremendous for his development the first year, it’s the risk that we have to take. Westbrook starting means he will command a high volume of shots which we should agree to because 1. He also rebounds and 2. Passes the ball. He does turn it over but so will Cade and Ivey so that’s redundant. He will teach Ivey his methods and really take the heat off Cade for whatever that’s worth. Trade Olynyk and Noel also means opening up mins for Duren at C to start right away. If the right deal is offered, Westbrook is a good trade but the truth is, we don’t need him or the future late FRP. The trick here is if we trade for him and by the trade deadline find a contender that’ll take him for a young player or a pick. By the trade deadline Westbrook will only be owed like ~25m. Also this trade makes more sense if Lakers give us 10m in cash.

They can’t give $10 million, also we can’t accept it because we took back the maximum amount allowed to get Walker/Duren.

Since the Thunder traded him for Chris Paul, name the player he’s made better.

I don’t mind, don’t think it’s realistic though, trading whatever for Westbrook and a pair of unprotected firsts. I do mind drafting a guy 5th overall in the 3rd year of a rebuild and then acquiring a player described as “recently fallen off a cliff” as an odd way to develop young talent.

Let’s be honest, Westbrook is not coming here at 33 in a contract year to come off the bench. So he’d have to start. Which is taking the ball out of Cades hands and pushing Ivey to the bench.

I also don’t understand how it’s good for Iveys development to come off the bench for awhile, but throw Duren right into the starting lineup.

If we do my best case if we get Westbrook and buy him out. You’re still on the books for like $40 million and you have to sign 3 players to add to the bench. Unless you’re getting guaranteed unprotected firsts (2 maybe 3), it’s not a trade worth doing.

It’s a bad trade. By no means do I want Westbrook. I never suggested the trade. I’m talking about how it would work if we do make a trade for him. Personally I wanna see what Killian does off the bench first and if he sucks we can either trade him or sign a Ricky Rubio next summer or Ramon Rondo. Veteran worth the MLE first PG off the bench. Westbrook is stupid to trade for and I would never want him unless we get 2 FRPs which we won’t. That was my point. The reason you’d have to start Duren is because we’d be thin up front if we’re giving Olynyk and Noel. Also I believe Ivey is immediately ready to start from day one. The way him coming off the bench helps is he takes all the shots but there’s plenty for him in the starting lineup without Westbrook of course.

Ok. Was kind of responding to both your post and the one you were replying to.

I just don’t get the interest in getting Westbrook. Let him figure out a way to be truly effective and then maybe.

[Manocad]

They can’t give $10 million, also we can’t accept it because we took back the maximum amount allowed to get Walker/Duren.

Since the Thunder traded him for Chris Paul, name the player he’s made better.

I don’t mind, don’t think it’s realistic though, trading whatever for Westbrook and a pair of unprotected firsts. I do mind drafting a guy 5th overall in the 3rd year of a rebuild and then acquiring a player described as “recently fallen off a cliff” as an odd way to develop young talent.

Let’s be honest, Westbrook is not coming here at 33 in a contract year to come off the bench. So he’d have to start. Which is taking the ball out of Cades hands and pushing Ivey to the bench.

I also don’t understand how it’s good for Iveys development to come off the bench for awhile, but throw Duren right into the starting lineup.

If we do my best case if we get Westbrook and buy him out. You’re still on the books for like $40 million and you have to sign 3 players to add to the bench. Unless you’re getting guaranteed unprotected firsts (2 maybe 3), it’s not a trade worth doing.

It’s a bad trade. By no means do I want Westbrook. I never suggested the trade. I’m talking about how it would work if we do make a trade for him. Personally I wanna see what Killian does off the bench first and if he sucks we can either trade him or sign a Ricky Rubio next summer or Ramon Rondo. Veteran worth the MLE first PG off the bench. Westbrook is stupid to trade for and I would never want him unless we get 2 FRPs which we won’t. That was my point. The reason you’d have to start Duren is because we’d be thin up front if we’re giving Olynyk and Noel. Also I believe Ivey is immediately ready to start from day one. The way him coming off the bench helps is he takes all the shots but there’s plenty for him in the starting lineup without Westbrook of course.

Ok. Was kind of responding to both your post and the one you were replying to.

I just don’t get the interest in getting Westbrook. Let him figure out a way to be truly effective and then maybe.

For most of us I think there is zero interest in Westbrook specifically. The interest was in 2023 and 2027 FRP's. That's the hypothetical trade that was proposed. Other than that it's how to utilize Westbrook such that he provides the greatest benefit to the team for a year.

[bstein14]

I'd trade for Westbrook + 2027 unprotected first... giving up Kelly O, CoJo, Noel, and Burks. Would be a no brainer for us... Let the young kids play, get more cap space for next year, and a possible valuable asset a few years down the road.

[breezypeezy]

Westbrook is a useless ballhog.
I don't think it would be worthwhile having him anywhere near Cade or Jaden.
If your doing the trade to get the pick(s), KO, Cojo and Noels is enough since we're probably helping the Lakers clear some capspace, they don't get Burkes too when we're doing the favor here, throw them Knox if they are enamored to NY hacks.

[mattao313]

If we did trade for Westbrook he doesn't necessarily have to play he could just sit out like Wall did in Houston.

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

[Manocad]

Westbrook is a useless ballhog.
I don't think it would be worthwhile having him anywhere near Cade or Jaden.
If your doing the trade to get the pick(s), KO, Cojo and Noels is enough since we're probably helping the Lakers clear some capspace, they don't get Burkes too when we're doing the favor here, throw them Knox if they are enamored to NY hacks.

Casey has the authority to decide who plays and who doesn’t. If this trade actually happened and Westbrook didn’t play the way Casey wants him to play, he doesn’t get to play. Pretty simple.