Pascal Siakam Trade Speculation Thread

[redraptor77]

Am I the only one who doesn't want Mathurin?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

I think he is a great six man for now. Young can shoot handle super fast. If he matures he seems like the biggest break out potential player.
How come you don’t like him ?

[MikeM]

I don't think we're going to target selfish players. A guy I could see targeted is someone like Dyson Daniels or Josh Green.

[Psubs]

Am I the only one who doesn't want Mathurin?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

No, I'm with you.

I wanted Mathurin more before the OG trade. I still like Mathurin as a prospect. He has had more success this season as a 6th man rather than as a starter which is making me wonder if that might be his ultimate role.

Jarace Walker is up there at the top of the list currently along with Keegan Murray. I am definitely not mad if we end up with Mathurin.

Mathurin will be the starting SG next season.

Maybe if Indiana loses to Boston AGAIN tonight, they'll pull the trigger. I guess beating Milwaukee 4 times this season, made them think they could hang with anyone, but Boston is providing a reality check.

[Psubs]

I don't think we're going to target selfish players. A guy I could see targeted is someone like Dyson Daniels or Josh Green.

Neither are enough to pull the trigger. Adding JJ Hardy is still not enough.

[ArthurVandelay]

Moving Pascal is a must. We likely won’t get fair vlaue, but paying him max makes even less sense. Also we don’t have enough shots to go around and right now I would prioritise Barnes, IQ and RJ. Get a young player with upside

why is it a must ? he stays. give him a five year contract and he stays

Did you see what happened to Washington with Beal?

Or Lillard in Portland?

There is a very significant risk you end up having to move assets to move that contract. Even a few years back moving DeMarre Carroll took a first and a second round pick.

[Madvillainy2004]

I just don't see it with Kuminga, I like Moody + Pondz better as prospects tbh and I'm not super high on them either.

[Rapsfan07]

Moving Pascal is a must. We likely won’t get fair vlaue, but paying him max makes even less sense. Also we don’t have enough shots to go around and right now I would prioritise Barnes, IQ and RJ. Get a young player with upside

why is it a must ? he stays. give him a five year contract and he stays

Did you see what happened to Washington with Beal?

Or Lillard in Portland?

There is a very significant risk you end up having to move assets to move that contract. Even a few years back moving DeMarre Carroll took a first and a second round pick.

No disrespect to those who are in the "resign Siakam" camp because I truly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. That is the point and enjoyment that these discussions bring.

But if after all the discussion around the real implications of paying Siakam the 5 year max have been explained, plus the real life examples of other players who were paid and how that handicapped their team is not enough for people to see it, it really doesn't make any sense to continue to go back and forth about it.

There's been LIllard. There's been Beal. There's been Harris. There's been Lavine.

So if people haven't seen it yet, they aren't going to start seeing it now.

[Psubs]

I just don't see it with Kuminga, I like Moody + Pondz better as prospects tbh and I'm not super high on them either.

Kuminga seems like Corey Maggette that doesn't shoot FT's well.

[MikeM]

I don't think we're going to target selfish players. A guy I could see targeted is someone like Dyson Daniels or Josh Green.

Neither are enough to pull the trigger. Adding JJ Hardy is still not enough.

Daniels has way higher potential than Kuminga or Mathurin. Green I'm not sure.

[TravisScott55]

Really want Mathurin and Walker.

[ishoy123]

why is it a must ? he stays. give him a five year contract and he stays

Did you see what happened to Washington with Beal?

Or Lillard in Portland?

There is a very significant risk you end up having to move assets to move that contract. Even a few years back moving DeMarre Carroll took a first and a second round pick.

No disrespect to those who are in the "resign Siakam" camp because I truly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. That is the point and enjoyment that these discussions bring.

But if after all the discussion around the real implications of paying Siakam the 5 year max have been explained, plus the real life examples of other players who were paid and how that handicapped their team is not enough for people to see it, it really doesn't make any sense to continue to go back and forth about it.

There's been LIllard. There's been Beal. There's been Harris. There's been Lavine.

So if people haven't seen it yet, they aren't going to start seeing it now.

As you noted, no disrespect at all. One of the great things about sports is that we can argue about it.

But Lillard and Beal were unique circumstances where Portland and Washington had no negotiating leverage. Lavine similarly has very well understood flaws to his game. Siakam is a proven second fiddle on a championship team and is a pro, so he probably won't force his way to Miami for e.g.

TLDR: I think you will get a pretty good haul for Siakam even on a 5 year deal.

[mademan]

I just don't see it with Kuminga, I like Moody + Pondz better as prospects tbh and I'm not super high on them either.

If we could get Moody/Podz/1st/swap, i'd take it. Keep Kuminga away from here. Im done with shaky shooting low BBIQ players

[greekman]

why is it a must ? he stays. give him a five year contract and he stays

Did you see what happened to Washington with Beal?

Or Lillard in Portland?

There is a very significant risk you end up having to move assets to move that contract. Even a few years back moving DeMarre Carroll took a first and a second round pick.

No disrespect to those who are in the "resign Siakam" camp because I truly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. That is the point and enjoyment that these discussions bring.

But if after all the discussion around the real implications of paying Siakam the 5 year max have been explained, plus the real life examples of other players who were paid and how that handicapped their team is not enough for people to see it, it really doesn't make any sense to continue to go back and forth about it.

There's been LIllard. There's been Beal. There's been Harris. There's been Lavine.

So if people haven't seen it yet, they aren't going to start seeing it now.

are you seriously comparing tobias harris to siakam ? beal and lavine are one dimensional players and lillard was traded the same age siakam will be the last year of a max contract.

[Psubs]

Really want Mathurin and Walker.

Of course but would have to probably add Trent or Schroder for McConnell. Oh what about adding the Pistons 2024 2nd pick?

Pascal, Temple, Koloko and 2024 2nd pick (Det) for Mathurin, Walker, Hield and more filler?

[Rapsfan07]

Did you see what happened to Washington with Beal?

Or Lillard in Portland?

There is a very significant risk you end up having to move assets to move that contract. Even a few years back moving DeMarre Carroll took a first and a second round pick.

No disrespect to those who are in the "resign Siakam" camp because I truly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. That is the point and enjoyment that these discussions bring.

But if after all the discussion around the real implications of paying Siakam the 5 year max have been explained, plus the real life examples of other players who were paid and how that handicapped their team is not enough for people to see it, it really doesn't make any sense to continue to go back and forth about it.

There's been LIllard. There's been Beal. There's been Harris. There's been Lavine.

So if people haven't seen it yet, they aren't going to start seeing it now.

As you noted, no disrespect at all. One of the great things about sports is that we can argue about it.

But Lillard and Beal were unique circumstances where Portland and Washington had no negotiating leverage. Lavine similarly has very well understood flaws to his game. Siakam is a proven second fiddle on a championship team and is a pro, so he probably won't force his way to Miami for e.g.

TLDR: I think you will get a pretty good haul for Siakam even on a 5 year deal.

Agreed. It is half the fun when it comes to sports.

That said though, I don't see how Lillard and Beal's situations as detailed by you is any different from what we have now. We also have little to no negotiating leverage and Siakam has flaws to his game as well. The only difference being that Siakam played a major role in a championship team. But where Lillard is concerned, I think there's little doubt that he could play a major role in a championship team.

So I don't really see the major differences.

[YogurtProducer]

Moving Pascal is a must. We likely won’t get fair vlaue, but paying him max makes even less sense. Also we don’t have enough shots to go around and right now I would prioritise Barnes, IQ and RJ. Get a young player with upside

why is it a must ? he stays. give him a five year contract and he stays

Did you see what happened to Washington with Beal?

Or Lillard in Portland?

There is a very significant risk you end up having to move assets to move that contract. Even a few years back moving DeMarre Carroll took a first and a second round pick.

What are you talking about????

Washington for Beal ended up getting:

Chris Paul
Landry Shamet
Bilal Coulibaly (No. 7 pick, via Pacers) - gave up #8 though
2024 first-round pick swap
2024 second-round pick
2025 second-round pick
2026 first-round pick swap
2026 second-round pick
2027 second-round pick
2028 first-round pick swap
2028 second-round pick
2030 first-round pick swap
2030 second-round pick

Portland for Dame ended up getting:

Deandre Ayton (via Suns)
Toumani Camara (via Suns)
Jrue Holiday (via Bucks)
2029 1st-round pick (via Bucks)
Two first-round pick swaps with Bucks (2028, 2030)

and also gave up Nasir Little + Nurkic to do it


Why bring up Dame/Beal and act like they gave up assets to move them?

[YogurtProducer]

No disrespect to those who are in the "resign Siakam" camp because I truly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. That is the point and enjoyment that these discussions bring.

But if after all the discussion around the real implications of paying Siakam the 5 year max have been explained, plus the real life examples of other players who were paid and how that handicapped their team is not enough for people to see it, it really doesn't make any sense to continue to go back and forth about it.

There's been LIllard. There's been Beal. There's been Harris. There's been Lavine.

So if people haven't seen it yet, they aren't going to start seeing it now.

Portland, and Washington both ended up getting significant assets in return for Lillard and Beal - talent ends up trumping everything else in the long run. Trying to figure out exactly how those two teams ended up "handicapped".

Harris just is not that good. He is massively overpaid for being an average starting caliber player. He is not where near Siakam.

A healthy Lavine is probably a good contract to. Not really a good example when he has the talent he just cant stay on the floor.

[Son Goku 25]

How about someone like Towns? I know he might not be seen as a winner or soft but in the right environment he could be really valuable for us as a stretch big and good length to be a good defender kind of like how Brook Lopez changed into a defensive monster.

[Rapsfan07]

Did you see what happened to Washington with Beal?

Or Lillard in Portland?

There is a very significant risk you end up having to move assets to move that contract. Even a few years back moving DeMarre Carroll took a first and a second round pick.

No disrespect to those who are in the "resign Siakam" camp because I truly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. That is the point and enjoyment that these discussions bring.

But if after all the discussion around the real implications of paying Siakam the 5 year max have been explained, plus the real life examples of other players who were paid and how that handicapped their team is not enough for people to see it, it really doesn't make any sense to continue to go back and forth about it.

There's been LIllard. There's been Beal. There's been Harris. There's been Lavine.

So if people haven't seen it yet, they aren't going to start seeing it now.

are you seriously comparing tobias harris to siakam ? beal and lavine are one dimensional players and lillard was traded the same age siakam will be the last year of a max contract.

No, not at all. Not skill-wise anyway. Although, in the course of critiquing my argument, it seems you compared Lillard to Siakam. Please do correct me if I'm wrong - I don't want to misrepresent your position.

That said, I don't think we have to discuss the vast difference in talent between Lillard and Siakam...right?

[Rapsfan07]

How about someone like Towns? I know he might not be seen as a winner or soft but in the right environment he could be really valuable for us as a stretch big and good length to be a good defender kind of like how Brook Lopez changed into a defensive monster.

Despite all the flack he gets, I do like Towns. But I can't see him being dealt. The Wolves dealt 5 picks to put Gobert behind him and they're playing extremely well this season.