ForeverTFC wrote:Scase wrote:The problem I run into, is that what we can send out that doesn't entirely gut the team, the Bucks likely dont take. Say RJ + salary and all those picks, them running Dame and RJ would be the laughing stock of the league for guard rotation defence, and since they don't have their own picks it makes no sense. You could always package RJ/IQ, but I think the Bucks would need to offload Dame somewhere which wont be easy, and then we lose our PG.
That said, moving Scottie afterwards would make sense and allow us to get a PG/Centre, I still think that no matter what, we don't have the assets to make this trade and still field a team that would really make any noise. Playoffs are a certainty, and I would say even 2nd round is almost certain, but while we've got him on contract, I can't see how it would result in anything substantial, all while blowing basically everything we have.
Just seems super short-sighted.
Masai and Co. have given us enough evidence to know they won't make this move without having a plan in place to compete (see Kawhi trade, KD and Lillard trade proposals). Ultimately, the market sets the price. I'm glad they're trying to do this.
Eh, this is the bare minimum IMO. They should be in the conversation, as should any team. I'm on the fence about them having a plan in place, the evidence we have is outdated and eclipsed by more recent history of either having no plan (FVV) or a poor plan (Jak/Siakam etc).
The successful Kawhi plan was set in motion well before that with other trades prior, and then a follow up trade, maybe that's BI, maybe it's something else. I don't think it's the worst idea to go after Giannis, the end cost is naturally what all should be judged on though. For now I'm on team "let's go for it" and go from there.
We'll have to make some serious changes to our C position if we plan to get him, Jak is just going to neuter Giannis' game too much.
ATLTimekeeper wrote:Scase wrote:
Yeah but in the event things go tits up, you don't want your picks every 2 years. Not only does it limit you if you have bad seasons, but you can't trade anything and locks you into attempting to compete no matter the roster. This is like a 10x riskier version of the Kawhi trade, cept without the potential return. Just seems like not a great idea, definitely makes sense for MLSE and ticket sales etc though.
The odds of a first overall player becoming a top 5 player in the NBA aren't all that good, anyway, so I'm willing to pay that price for even a couple of seasons of one. The downside is mitigated by retaining those picks every other year.
The Spurs wouldn't disclose Kawhi's medical information, wouldn't let Toronto talk to Kawhi's people, wouldn't work with Kawhi or LA. The Raptors weren't certain Kawhi would even show up. There was considerable risk there at the time, and the price was factored into that risk.
If we had a team similar to the 2017 Raps I would be in full agreement with you, but the last 2 season + not really knowing how this roster plays together yet further increases that risk. Now that isn't something that would impact what the Bucks expect in return, but it absolutely impacts how much we should be willing to pay.
This is us taking a huge risk, a much bigger one than with Kawhi.
28-30th picks why would that be enticing at all to them?...If that would be the case Giannis is going to be a Pelican and get their picks back so they can at least tank properly...