2024-25 Season Discussion and Speculation

[bwgood77]

Looking around the L for a possible Nurkic trade - man, the second apron makes it tough. But I found this:

After Dec. 15 - Nurkic + [whatever draft capital we have left] for Jonas Valanciunas and Johnny Davis.

Even when I'm optimistic about Nurk, I don't think he's better than Val. Nurk's expiring, so the Wizards get some value out of Val's contract. Val has two more years at $10 mil per, which I don't think is unreasonable. What do y'all think?

Actually, I think Nurk has one more year after this one. Another one I thought of given since we are playing the Sixers tonight, though it may not make sense for them...

I kind of thought Drummond was old and done, but I'm surprised he is only 1 year older than Nurkic. The Sixers are a team that might like Nurkic, but I don't know if Drummond is better or not. Or if they could take back the extra salary. But I guess maybe they could send back matching salary, but most of their other decent sized salaries are pretty good guys they use, so it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for them either.

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

Looking around the L for a possible Nurkic trade - man, the second apron makes it tough. But I found this:

After Dec. 15 - Nurkic + [whatever draft capital we have left] for Jonas Valanciunas and Johnny Davis.

Even when I'm optimistic about Nurk, I don't think he's better than Val. Nurk's expiring, so the Wizards get some value out of his contract. Val has two more years at $10 mil per, which I don't think is unreasonable. What do y'all think?

I wouldn't do it.

With all his flaws and all I think Nurkic is slightly better than Valanciunas and he is loved by his teammates and coaches already in Phoenix.

Even if you think that Valanciunas is better than Nurkic (debatable) it wouldn't be never by much, so it would be a lateral move that could alter the nice chemistry.

I don't think Nurk is really that close to Val, actually. Val's shown consistency shooting the 3 ball in the past, and his FG% is just so much better than Nurk's. Neither can protect the rim very well - though I'd take Nurk's length by a hair - and both are fantastic, lumbering rebounders.

bw was talking about Nurk's shooting slump, but even when he recovers from it, he's always been a bad finisher. JAV and Nurk are just worlds apart on offense that I can't imagine it wouldn't be a substantial upgrade. I respect your opinion, though.

Actually, I think Nurk has one more year after this one. Another one I thought of given since we are playing the Sixers tonight, though it may not make sense for them...

Oh, my bad on Nurk's contract. You're probably right that there's nothing for WAS to gain a deal for Nurk, then.

Of the other guys you mentioned, I just don't trust the young (or oft-injured) guys to start.

Still plenty of time left in the season for Nurk to get in the groove. Allen had a really good shooting night against Portland, so that's a big positive. It's just gotta be really hard for our FO to maneuver given our salary situation.

[Saberestar]

Also, when Nash went there Kobe made it a point to basically be a PG and have huge assist games, I guess trying to prove a point "hey, I could have done and can do what Nash did anyway" and turned Nash into a spot up shooter. Kobe was pretty petty during his career.

Nash was almost done as a basketball player when he arrived to the Lakers, like CP3 last year on the GSW.

He averaged 10.7 apg and had his best FG% in like 5 years in his last year in PHX, was an all star and got MVP votes. He hurt his back in LA which ended his career but when he got there he was still a great shooter and a great assist guy.

He shot like 44% from 3 with LA the first year and still was a great passer, but just didn't handle the main ball handling duties nearly as much.

You know that one year can make a huge difference when a player is over certain age and Nash was 38 years old when he went to the Lakers.

Like every ATG he was declining slowly but at 38 being that small and with back problems he wasn't the same player anymore...he was good but not Nashty. Kobe was in his late prime yet.

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

Nash was almost done as a basketball player when he arrived to the Lakers, like CP3 last year on the GSW.

He averaged 10.7 apg and had his best FG% in like 5 years in his last year in PHX, was an all star and got MVP votes. He hurt his back in LA which ended his career but when he got there he was still a great shooter and a great assist guy.

He shot like 44% from 3 with LA the first year and still was a great passer, but just didn't handle the main ball handling duties nearly as much.

You know that one year can make a huge difference when a player is over certain age and Nash was 38 years old when he went to the Lakers.

Like every ATG he was declining slowly but at 38 being that small and with back problems he wasn't the same player anymore...he was good but not Nashty. Kobe was in his late prime yet.

I remember thinking he'd aged a ton the first time I saw Nash in a Lakers jersey. Was probably just the short hair.

[bwgood77]

Nash was almost done as a basketball player when he arrived to the Lakers, like CP3 last year on the GSW.

He averaged 10.7 apg and had his best FG% in like 5 years in his last year in PHX, was an all star and got MVP votes. He hurt his back in LA which ended his career but when he got there he was still a great shooter and a great assist guy.

He shot like 44% from 3 with LA the first year and still was a great passer, but just didn't handle the main ball handling duties nearly as much.

You know that one year can make a huge difference when a player is over certain age and Nash was 38 years old when he went to the Lakers.

Like every ATG he was declining slowly but at 38 being that small and with back problems he wasn't the same player anymore...he was good but not Nashty. Kobe was in his late prime yet.

OK, but that has nothing to do with Kobe deciding to show how many assists he could get. Nash was still a great passer and had a great shooting season that year.

[lilfishi22]

Still early in the season but the OKC Thunder have a defensive rating of 97.5. No team has had a sub-100 DRTG since the 2015-2016 Spurs who had a 99.0 DRTG. For context, the average DRTG back then was 106.4 whereas it's now 113.0. The average pace then was 95.8 whereas it's 99.9 right now. GSW had the highest ORTG at 114.5; that would be good for 12th right now. The Rockets had the highest 3PT rate 37%; that's good for 26th in today's league (Boston's at 55.1%)

The Warriors are also decimating competition. They have the highest net rating currently at 17.9, 4th in ORTG and 2nd in DRTG. I thought they were going to be slightly worse this season...Haven't looked at the bench stats yet but their bench might be better than their starting line up without Steph

Edit: OK just looked it up. Warriors bench is indeed better than their starting line up. Bench is putting up 61pts (best in the league) which is a plus 10.8pts from the next team down. Their starters put up 60pts a game (2nd worst in the league).

Our bench is 24th in the league in scoring, I suppose that is not unexpected given most of our scoring comes is concentrated around the Big 3.

The Thunder our amazing, and our great defensively everywhere. Shai, Caruso, Dort and Jalen are great defenders, as is Chet, and Hartenstein hasn't even played yet.

GS is better than I expected, but their biggest wins were against Utah and Portland. They did beat the Pelicans twice, but they are also without Murray and Trey Murphy, plus McCollum in one of those games.

Houston almost came back to beat them.

But GS has done a good job of adding young talent while their old guys decline. And Curry is still great. Wiggins playing a bit better. I expect them to cool off, but their young guys have improved.

You mean younger guys like Wiggins and Hield to hold down the fort? Or you mean their young young guys like Podz, Kuminga and TJD? I think they did pretty well with TJD and Podz, especially at where they were picked but between Kuminga, Moody and Wiseman, I thought they underachieved with their lotto picks. Kuminga and Moody have been solid contributors but Kuminga has disappointed in my view. We don't even need to talk about Wiseman.

[Saberestar]

He averaged 10.7 apg and had his best FG% in like 5 years in his last year in PHX, was an all star and got MVP votes. He hurt his back in LA which ended his career but when he got there he was still a great shooter and a great assist guy.

He shot like 44% from 3 with LA the first year and still was a great passer, but just didn't handle the main ball handling duties nearly as much.

You know that one year can make a huge difference when a player is over certain age and Nash was 38 years old when he went to the Lakers.

Like every ATG he was declining slowly but at 38 being that small and with back problems he wasn't the same player anymore...he was good but not Nashty. Kobe was in his late prime yet.

OK, but that has nothing to do with Kobe deciding to show how many assists he could get. Nash was still a great passer and had a great shooting season that year.

I am just saying that it's possible that Kobe would have delegated more to Nash in years earlier than when he finally arrived to LA.

[lilfishi22]

Looking around the L for a possible Nurkic trade - man, the second apron makes it tough. But I found this:

After Dec. 15 - Nurkic + [whatever draft capital we have left] for Jonas Valanciunas and Johnny Davis.

Even when I'm optimistic about Nurk, I don't think he's better than Val. Nurk's expiring, so the Wizards get some value out of his contract. Val has two more years at $10 mil per, which I don't think is unreasonable. What do y'all think?

I was actually just looking at Val today...had to google him to see what team he was on. Not so much because I was thinking of trading for him, but it did pop up into my mind.

I don't think that's really much of an upgrade. I think Nurk is a little better than he is playing. He is horrible shooting, but not quite as horrible as he's been.

I've felt this board as overvalued Mitchell Robinson, but at this point I might take him. Though I don't know if the Knicks would prefer to have Nurkic as a backup than Robinson. Probably not.

I just can't see any reason a team would trade for Nurkic unless they were getting rid of a horrible contract, or a long one. I think we might have to do someone like Allen if a team needs 3 pt shooting.

It would be nice if we could get Mark Williams or Nick Richards. I don't know why they would, because both are cheap and pretty good. But they are both somewhat injury prone. Nick Richards is an UFA in 2 summers. They both make $5 million or less. But they do want to compete.

Maybe if we took on Grant Williams because he has a long contract, but I still wouldn't do it if I was Charlotte. However, Nick Richards and Grant Williams make like 100K less than Nurkic or something like that. Williams is a Bud type of player too...3 pt shooting PF.

Maybe if we threw in a pick. I still wouldn't do it if I'm Charlotte though and at least trying to make a push for the playoffs.

I'd easily take Val over Nurk at this point. Val has consistently been the better offensive rebounder, significantly more efficient, and historically has taken better care of the ball. I should also mention Val has also been pretty healthy throughout his career, with 62 games played being his lowest over the past 5 years. For what we need out of a C right now, we don't have use (and probably should actively discourage) Nurk's playmaking ability.

[lilfishi22]

Did someone mention this already or did I just miss it?

Devin Booker and Donovan Mitchell have been named the NBA's Players of the Week for Week 2.

Booker averaged 33.7 points, 5.7 rebounds and 6.3 assists as the Phoenix Suns went 3-0.

Mitchell averaged 25.3 points and 4.3 assists as the Cleveland Cavaliers went 4-0.

[AtheJ415]

Looking around the L for a possible Nurkic trade - man, the second apron makes it tough. But I found this:

After Dec. 15 - Nurkic + [whatever draft capital we have left] for Jonas Valanciunas and Johnny Davis.

Even when I'm optimistic about Nurk, I don't think he's better than Val. Nurk's expiring, so the Wizards get some value out of Val's contract. Val has two more years at $10 mil per, which I don't think is unreasonable. What do y'all think?

Actually, I think Nurk has one more year after this one. Another one I thought of given since we are playing the Sixers tonight, though it may not make sense for them...

I kind of thought Drummond was old and done, but I'm surprised he is only 1 year older than Nurkic. The Sixers are a team that might like Nurkic, but I don't know if Drummond is better or not. Or if they could take back the extra salary. But I guess maybe they could send back matching salary, but most of their other decent sized salaries are pretty good guys they use, so it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for them either.

I don't see the point of trading for Val. We don't need a post up big. If we're going to post somebody up we can post up with DBook or Durant against their matchups. We need an athletic rim protector primarily, and ideally one who can shoot enough to have to be guarded outside of the paint.

Even a BIyombo type would be better than Val imo in terms of fit with this team. A big part of why Nurk doesn't work is that for his passing to be valuable he has to have the ball, and he's always the worst playmaker of all 5 players on the court at the other positions. A playmaking big only has value to the extent they can playmake better than the other player normally in that role. It is also part of why Simmons and Draymond are overrated in that regard. It's a nice to have quality for a big but not a must. We need the must have qualities (athleticism and rim protection).

I'm good with Drummond on that front, but would prefer a guy who can shoot a little bit, but even then give me a Drummond type over Val.

[bwgood77]

Still early in the season but the OKC Thunder have a defensive rating of 97.5. No team has had a sub-100 DRTG since the 2015-2016 Spurs who had a 99.0 DRTG. For context, the average DRTG back then was 106.4 whereas it's now 113.0. The average pace then was 95.8 whereas it's 99.9 right now. GSW had the highest ORTG at 114.5; that would be good for 12th right now. The Rockets had the highest 3PT rate 37%; that's good for 26th in today's league (Boston's at 55.1%)

The Warriors are also decimating competition. They have the highest net rating currently at 17.9, 4th in ORTG and 2nd in DRTG. I thought they were going to be slightly worse this season...Haven't looked at the bench stats yet but their bench might be better than their starting line up without Steph

Edit: OK just looked it up. Warriors bench is indeed better than their starting line up. Bench is putting up 61pts (best in the league) which is a plus 10.8pts from the next team down. Their starters put up 60pts a game (2nd worst in the league).

Our bench is 24th in the league in scoring, I suppose that is not unexpected given most of our scoring comes is concentrated around the Big 3.

The Thunder our amazing, and our great defensively everywhere. Shai, Caruso, Dort and Jalen are great defenders, as is Chet, and Hartenstein hasn't even played yet.

GS is better than I expected, but their biggest wins were against Utah and Portland. They did beat the Pelicans twice, but they are also without Murray and Trey Murphy, plus McCollum in one of those games.

Houston almost came back to beat them.

But GS has done a good job of adding young talent while their old guys decline. And Curry is still great. Wiggins playing a bit better. I expect them to cool off, but their young guys have improved.

You mean younger guys like Wiggins and Hield to hold down the fort? Or you mean their young young guys like Podz, Kuminga and TJD? I think they did pretty well with TJD and Podz, especially at where they were picked but between Kuminga, Moody and Wiseman, I thought they underachieved with their lotto picks. Kuminga and Moody have been solid contributors but Kuminga has disappointed in my view. We don't even need to talk about Wiseman.

I was just talking about Kuminga, Moody, Podz and Jackson-Davis.

Didn't even think of HIeld, but he was a great addition and an upgrade from Klay at this point, though he's not young. If we're talking about other additions, Melton and Kyle Anderson were nice additions as well.

[dremill24]

Spoiler:

Will have a deeper read through later but only have time to read the numbers stuff at the end which is interesting.

- I'm a bit surprised by the single Big 3 line ups. With Beal out for 2 games, there must've been a decent amount of single big 3 lineups during those games and they couldn't be that bad right?
- Those Nurk minutes are insanely bad.....
- BRef has our Points per 100 as 115.6pts for 9th in the league. ORB% is 16.2% for last. Wonder why the discrepancy.

Cleaning the Glass filters out garbage time n heaves n stuff

Could also have been updated since I pulled the #s too i suppose

Lineups are just kinda nothing atm, all it takes is one stretch to change it pretty drastically. The Beal only stuff doesnt look nearly as good without that 1st quarter vs Lakers, for example.

I like how you use Cleaning the Glass, since they throw out all the junk time stats, heaves, etc. I used to subscribe. Are you going to write at all about other teams? Personally aside from the Suns I am interested in the WC, but if you write about some big market teams too, you can probably increase traffic big time, and I can spread the word to other fanbases as well.

Just a thought, but of course I'd like the focus on the Suns. But if you hit on the Knicks, Celtics, Sixers, Rockets, LA teams, GS, etc, all the huge market teams, especially if they are good, that will probably significantly increase your reader base in time. Especially with guys like Zach Lowe out for now and 538 #s gone.

There probably is an opening for in depth analysis. Of course you can't watch all the games, but digging into the #s is good. Do you watch many other teams?

I'd love to hit more frequently on other teams, I just have a hard time fitting it into the day at the moment. I have a day job, wife/kids, some extracurricular professional certificate programs, squeeze in some writing at FanSided, etc.

Im still trying to work out a regular cadence to fit everything in. Suns games are already ingrained into my everyday life so its much easier to make that the main subject, but I would like to dig into some other teams if I can. The quality of the Suns stuff is just going to be so much higher with the extra familiarity.

Im just kinda dipping my toe in right now. I am sharing here & there cause thats what you do but Im not honestly trying to squeeze out as many readers as possible at this point in time. Im definitely keeping things like what you're mentioning in mind though to incorporate later if I can find a way to create more bandwidth for this.

[lilfishi22]

Looking around the L for a possible Nurkic trade - man, the second apron makes it tough. But I found this:

After Dec. 15 - Nurkic + [whatever draft capital we have left] for Jonas Valanciunas and Johnny Davis.

Even when I'm optimistic about Nurk, I don't think he's better than Val. Nurk's expiring, so the Wizards get some value out of Val's contract. Val has two more years at $10 mil per, which I don't think is unreasonable. What do y'all think?

Actually, I think Nurk has one more year after this one. Another one I thought of given since we are playing the Sixers tonight, though it may not make sense for them...

I kind of thought Drummond was old and done, but I'm surprised he is only 1 year older than Nurkic. The Sixers are a team that might like Nurkic, but I don't know if Drummond is better or not. Or if they could take back the extra salary. But I guess maybe they could send back matching salary, but most of their other decent sized salaries are pretty good guys they use, so it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for them either.

I don't see the point of trading for Val. We don't need a post up big. If we're going to post somebody up we can post up with DBook or Durant against their matchups. We need an athletic rim protector primarily, and ideally one who can shoot enough to have to be guarded outside of the paint.

Even a BIyombo type would be better than Val imo in terms of fit with this team. A big part of why Nurk doesn't work is that for his passing to be valuable he has to have the ball, and he's always the worst playmaker of all 5 players on the court at the other positions. A playmaking big only has value to the extent they can playmake better than the other player normally in that role. It is also part of why Simmons and Draymond are overrated in that regard. It's a nice to have quality for a big but not a must. We need the must have qualities (athleticism and rim protection).

I'm good with Drummond on that front, but would prefer a guy who can shoot a little bit, but even then give me a Drummond type over Val.

We don't need a post up big nor do we need a playmaking big and that's not what he would be used for. Just like we don't use Nurk as a post up big nor do we really need his playmaking either. We'd be using him to set solid screens, we'd use him to finish at/around the rim (Val is 69% 0-3ft from the rim vs 61% for Nurk, also overall far more efficient), we'd be using him to pick up the rebounding load (Val's consistently been the better rebounder, esp on ORB) and maybe as important, he's been far healthier than Nurk.

Another thing to note is that Val has been a value add in the postseason whereas Nurk hasn't been. Nurk has always been inefficient for a C (career 54.7 TS%) whereas Val has been about average (61.6%), those percentages drop in the post season for Val but he's still at 59.2% whereas Nurk is still at the 54.6%. JV is the all NBA leader in DRB% and TRB% in the playoffs (an increase from the regular season) whereas Nurk's rebounding % drops.

Val isn't the ideal C I want to replace Nurk, make no mistake about it, but he's more effective at what we need our C to do, he's steps up in the playoffs and he's been healthier. Also unlike Drummond or Nurk, Val is an almost 80% FT shooter

For as big as Drummond is, he does only one thing well, rebound and he's not even as good as Val at that in the playoffs. He's also terrible from an efficiency standpoint (even worse than Nurk), shot 43% from the FT line in the playoffs,

[Mulhollanddrive]

Valanciunas is equally unplayable on defense though

[lilfishi22]

Valanciunas is equally unplayable on defense though

So is Drummond. It's unlikely you're getting anyone who's not gonna be unplayable somewhere with Nurk being the trade asset.

I look at what Nurk is and if you can get an upgrade on him to do what he's bad at (bar the defense) like finishing at the rim, consistent rebounding, lower turnovers then it's an upgrade in my books.

Maybe there's a guy out there who's actually a realistic trade target that I've missed but I just don't really see that when I look at the players under Nurk's salary. Perhaps there's a 3 way deal...I dunno but trade options aren't great and Val to me is one of the better ones

[dremill24]

At this point I'd be happy with a center who is just low usage on offense and and keeps us in the game on the defensive glass. Nurkic can be that guy but would have to drastically change his offensive approach to do so.

[lilfishi22]

At this point I'd be happy with a center who is just low usage on offense and and keeps us in the game on the defensive glass. Nurkic can be that guy but would have to drastically change his offensive approach to do so.

For me, a realistic (maybe not?) upgrade is just a big man who does the basic big man stuff well. When I think of a basic big, I think of a guy who rebounds, finishes well around the rim (high FG%), takes up space in the middle and isn't trying to stray too far from that. The issue with Nurk is he seems to want to do more, especially with his playmaking, he doesn't finish particularly well and he's been a negative in the playoffs.

Not asking for someone who can also defend in space, has 3PT shooting range or can create or anything. Just a basic big man, which Nurk is failing at currently.

[AtheJ415]

Actually, I think Nurk has one more year after this one. Another one I thought of given since we are playing the Sixers tonight, though it may not make sense for them...

I kind of thought Drummond was old and done, but I'm surprised he is only 1 year older than Nurkic. The Sixers are a team that might like Nurkic, but I don't know if Drummond is better or not. Or if they could take back the extra salary. But I guess maybe they could send back matching salary, but most of their other decent sized salaries are pretty good guys they use, so it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for them either.

I don't see the point of trading for Val. We don't need a post up big. If we're going to post somebody up we can post up with DBook or Durant against their matchups. We need an athletic rim protector primarily, and ideally one who can shoot enough to have to be guarded outside of the paint.

Even a BIyombo type would be better than Val imo in terms of fit with this team. A big part of why Nurk doesn't work is that for his passing to be valuable he has to have the ball, and he's always the worst playmaker of all 5 players on the court at the other positions. A playmaking big only has value to the extent they can playmake better than the other player normally in that role. It is also part of why Simmons and Draymond are overrated in that regard. It's a nice to have quality for a big but not a must. We need the must have qualities (athleticism and rim protection).

I'm good with Drummond on that front, but would prefer a guy who can shoot a little bit, but even then give me a Drummond type over Val.

We don't need a post up big nor do we need a playmaking big and that's not what he would be used for. Just like we don't use Nurk as a post up big nor do we really need his playmaking either. We'd be using him to set solid screens, we'd use him to finish at/around the rim (Val is 69% 0-3ft from the rim vs 61% for Nurk, also overall far more efficient), we'd be using him to pick up the rebounding load (Val's consistently been the better rebounder, esp on ORB) and maybe as important, he's been far healthier than Nurk.

Another thing to note is that Val has been a value add in the postseason whereas Nurk hasn't been. Nurk has always been inefficient for a C (career 54.7 TS%) whereas Val has been about average (61.6%), those percentages drop in the post season for Val but he's still at 59.2% whereas Nurk is still at the 54.6%. JV is the all NBA leader in DRB% and TRB% in the playoffs (an increase from the regular season) whereas Nurk's rebounding % drops.

Val isn't the ideal C I want to replace Nurk, make no mistake about it, but he's more effective at what we need our C to do, he's steps up in the playoffs and he's been healthier. Also unlike Drummond or Nurk, Val is an almost 80% FT shooter

For as big as Drummond is, he does only one thing well, rebound and he's not even as good as Val at that in the playoffs. He's also terrible from an efficiency standpoint (even worse than Nurk), shot 43% from the FT line in the playoffs,

We post up Nurk plenty. And we simply have no use for any big that doesn't defend the rim at a high level. That eliminates Nurk. He doesn't move the needle at all. No point in the trade whatsoever. Jonas's best attribute is his post game, and every time he shoots it is a negative because it means our hall of famers are not shooting. It's a bad idea.

[Qwigglez]

I would take JV over Nurkic 10 out of 10 times. James Jones is very familiar trading with the Wizards, so I could see a deal getting done there.

Steven Adams would be another guy I'd be interested in trading Nurkic for. Suns don't need a playmaking center, they just need someone who can play defense, rebound, hustle, and know their assignment. Adams fits that bill, the issue is trading with the Rockets where they may want additional assets, and I'm unsure if a deal could get done. Though, it could be possible, if for instance Adams mentions he wants to be starting so he won't re-sign with the Rockets this summer.

I think I'd prefer Steven Adams over JV to be honest.

[Mulhollanddrive]

So Nurkic pros and cons

Pros -
Defensive rebounder
Screen setter
Spreads floor
Decent FT%

Cons -
Finishing
Slow
Can't jump
Turnovers

Just might be something we have to live with