Ghost of Kleine wrote:lilfishi22 wrote:Ghost of Kleine wrote:
I just recently was having such a discussion on this with someone on this board! And ironically regarding the same points being made here by others. If giving up one of our very last remaining assets, why do it for positional redundancy? Why not actually look to address positions of need over positions we already have very expensive depth at? These decisions are looking more and more asinine cumulatively as wee go forward!
And I said for Allen and a 1st, it wasn't worth it .
If you can get a deal done while dropping a negative asset in Nurk, that is very clearly a different deal from trading a positive asset in Allen.
But moving Nurkic at the expense of dumping one of our very few remaining firsts isn't even necessary! He'd have value as an expiring this summer! You're necessarily giving up assets to move a player you weren't even playing anyways, and for another overpaid player who's dramatically underperforming and is redundant at that position already! It's an egregious waste of our already very limited assets for a player that is not at all a need for us!
At least with my trade proposal, it's reducing further redundancy, reducing long-term term cost commitment, AND adding size, frontcourt floor spacing, and versatility that we currently do not have with any of Richards, Plumlee, or Ighodaro all not being able to space the floor, etc. And adding significant rebounding, defense, and transition scoring/playmaking potency too with Mogbo!
(As indicated by the links/tweets/ articles that I shared with you in our discussion. Easily a much better value cumulative return than dumping a 1st to swap a soon-to-be expiring for another shooting guard who's making big money, but also can't even shoot which his entire value is predicated upon!
You're dumping value just to add redundancy while not at all fixing or addressing our very obvious issues in the process. So regardless of your subjective assessment of value, this trade is significantly worse for a number of reasons that I mentioned above!
If surrendering a 1st, there are easily much better and more logical Nurkic trades than this that would at least address some critical needs which my proposal said from your individual value assessment still obviously does by comparison man.
Maybe you're confusing my point. I said I'm very supportive of a Nurk + 1st for Olynynk plus whatever asset. What I'm NOT good with is your previous suggestion of Grayson Allen plus a 1st for Olynyk, Mogobo and some 2nd.
