Pelicans Called Bulls

[dougthonus]

If you really like Noa and think he's going to be a star, not trading him for the #23 pick and an uncertain 1st isn't the crime ppl are making it out to be.

Milwaukee is 100% making the playoffs next year. NO is uber talented, wants to win, and is regularly on 50 win pace when healthy. It's a gamble. Perhaps a gamble with high odds, but still a gamble. If you like Noa then the player matters more than the pick. This isn't football. One big hit on a draft pick is really worth like 5 picks. It all comes down to talent evaluations.

I think ppl are getting in the habit of thinking bc AK is a bad gm, everything he does is illogical. I don't see it that way. I think Matt on Blogabull said it well - AK has a roster, not a plan.

I think the argument that AK just likes Noa is way more compelling than we couldn't have gotten this deal. I would jump on this deal but acknowledge it has risks, and you might get less in the end. I think we didn't want it, and that might turn out correct.

I view it like 15% chance I get a ton more value, 80% chance I get about the same value, and 5% chance I lose value. But those are made up numbers based on my personal beliefs.

[_txchilibowl_]

I wouldn't completely discount the possibility that Dumars made up the other alleged offers in an attempt to artificially inflate Queen's value. The backlash was immediate. By saying they would have selected him at #9 he seems like a relative bargain at #13.

It's highly unlikely the other GMs would comment so there's a relatively low risk factor in Dumars being called out for it.

[dougthonus]

I wouldn't completely discount the possibility that Dumars made up the other alleged offers in an attempt to artificially inflate Queen's value. The backlash was immediate. By saying they would have selected him at #9 he seems like a relative bargain at #13.

It's highly unlikely the other GMs would comment so there's a relatively low risk factor in Dumars being called out for it.

Super unlikely they would comment directly, but overwhelmingly likely it would leak, especially if their fan bases were made for not getting that deal. Like if he didn't really call Portland and their GM is being rakes over the coals for making a worse deal, it is for sure coming out.

[DuckIII]

I think the doesn't apply scenario would make way more sense if there is some evidence of it. Like is anyone, anywhere suggesting it? Is Portland saying we couldn't have this deal? Is any Chicago media leaking we couldn't have this deal?

You said this earlier. Lets use Occam's Razor where it would really apply. Which is more likely:

(a) A team who drafts a guy, and then publicly announces that they'd have rather done something different if a particular trade were on the table, is effectively publicly **** on the rookie drafted while he walks in the door and sending the message to the fan base that the organization would prefer they had not drafted him.

(b) A team drafts a guy, focuses on the guy they drafted to support him and excite the fan base, and says nothing at all about a trade they would have rather executed instead.

Only the most idiotic organization with no concept at all for how PR works would do option (a). The absence of a statement that the deal was not offered fails the Occam's Razer principle pretty dramatically.

[kodo]

I'm sure Dumars didn't open negotiations with his best offer to all the teams 9-12, but there's no reason his best offer which he didn't state upfront would be any different for #12 vs #13. Most likely AK just didn't engage. You can't negotiate a better offer if you just hang up on the conversation. Atlanta probably engaged and said we're close, what else can you do? AK probably said no thank you.

The other factor is that Noa was supposed to go #9 by the most reputable drafts (Givony/ESPN/SI both had him #9), so that might have swayed things a bit in AK was trading a #9 guy. Givony had Tre/Maluach/Noa going in the same range.

[DuckIII]

I'm sure Dumars didn't open negotiations with his best offer to all the teams 9-12, but there's no reason his best offer which he didn't state upfront would be any different for #12 vs #13.

But there really is a reason it could go down that way. We're talking about it extensively, and its real.

[HomoSapien]

I still don't understand the extreme skepticism here:

1.) Eversely said they spoke to a team(s) about trading down.

2.) Dumars said they contacted every team after 9 until they had a deal.

3.) We have a half decade's worth of evidence that AKME don't particularly value draft capital.

[nomorezorro]

yeah like. even if you're confident that the bulls could have gotten the pelicans pick if they pushed for it, i think too much credence is being given to the idea that the failure to land the pick is the result of them being "bad at negotiating" without acknowledging the context that these negotiations are happening in

if the bulls weren't really interested in moving down but the hawks were, they have a massive advantage in terms of finding out what the pelicans are actually willing to give up. there is a very limited window to make a pick or execute a trade; if new orleans is calling you while you're on the clock and saying "hey do you have any interest in moving down to 23", how far are you expected to drag out this conversation Just In Case if the genuine answer is "not really, no"? if you say "what would you be willing to give up?" and their starting point is, say, "2026 milwaukee pick, top 10 protected," is it a failure to not engage further on the off chance that you're able to negotiate them up to the better of the milwaukee/pelicans picks with no protections? pick is due in 3 minutes btw

[DuckIII]

I still don't understand the extreme skepticism here:

1.) Eversely said they spoke to a team(s) about trading down.

2.) Dumars said they contacted every team after 9 until they had a deal.

3.) We have a half decade's worth of evidence that AKME don't particularly value draft capital.

Who is being skeptical of what? The only skepticism - better described as certainty, which is the problem - is coming from your side of the argument. No one disputes they discussed a trade. Its been explicitly confirmed by Dumars, and impliedly confirmed by Eversley.

[nomorezorro]

I still don't understand the extreme skepticism here:

1.) Eversely said they spoke to a team(s) about trading down.

2.) Dumars said they contacted every team after 9 until they had a deal.

3.) We have a half decade's worth of evidence that AKME don't particularly value draft capital.

the extreme skepticism is because the team picking directly ahead of us made a trade down for future draft capital that was a worse return than what the hawks got at 13. that is hard to square with the idea that the pelicans unprotected first was actively being offered to every one of the teams dumars called at 9-12, and it invites at least *some* doubt that he was even willing to put it on the table prior to engaging with atlanta

[DuckIII]

If you really like Noa and think he's going to be a star, not trading him for the #23 pick and an uncertain 1st isn't the crime ppl are making it out to be.

Milwaukee is 100% making the playoffs next year. NO is uber talented, wants to win, and is regularly on 50 win pace when healthy. It's a gamble. Perhaps a gamble with high odds, but still a gamble. If you like Noa then the player matters more than the pick. This isn't football. One big hit on a draft pick is really worth like 5 picks. It all comes down to talent evaluations.

I think ppl are getting in the habit of thinking bc AK is a bad gm, everything he does is illogical. I don't see it that way. I think Matt on Blogabull said it well - AK has a roster, not a plan.

I agree with all of this except the part about Milwaukee. Trading Giannis remains very much in play. That would turn this into a massive win by the Hawks (who, unlike us, did not have a guy they loved at 13 - many reports that Newell was one of their main targets anyway who was always a reach at 13).

[HomoSapien]

I still don't understand the extreme skepticism here:

1.) Eversely said they spoke to a team(s) about trading down.

2.) Dumars said they contacted every team after 9 until they had a deal.

3.) We have a half decade's worth of evidence that AKME don't particularly value draft capital.

Who is being skeptical of what? The only skepticism - better described as certainty, which is the problem - is coming from your side of the argument. No one disputes they discussed a trade. Its been explicitly confirmed by Dumars, and impliedly confirmed by Eversley.

Skeptical of being offered an unprotected pick. What else could they offer to convince someone to drop out of the lottery? Obviously they aren't offering Zion or Murphy. Murray's value is an all-time low. I don't think Herb Jones is good enough to warrant a trade for 12 but even if you did you would have to include someone solid like Ayo to match salaries. I think it's pretty obvious they would have to offer a future first. Even if it started with like a top 10 protection, it seems natural to say "sorry, it would need to have really low protections for me to be interested."

They never value draft capital... this aligns with how they do things.

[DuckIII]

I still don't understand the extreme skepticism here:

1.) Eversely said they spoke to a team(s) about trading down.

2.) Dumars said they contacted every team after 9 until they had a deal.

3.) We have a half decade's worth of evidence that AKME don't particularly value draft capital.

Who is being skeptical of what? The only skepticism - better described as certainty, which is the problem - is coming from your side of the argument. No one disputes they discussed a trade. Its been explicitly confirmed by Dumars, and impliedly confirmed by Eversley.

Skeptical of being offered an unprotected pick.

Fair. I guess I'm not interpreting the posts I'm reading from guys like Red and nomorezorro (and my own) as skepticism. I'm interpreting them to be offering a very plausible alternative to the (kinda unsupportable) absolutely certainty being expressed by others.

[HomoSapien]

I still don't understand the extreme skepticism here:

1.) Eversely said they spoke to a team(s) about trading down.

2.) Dumars said they contacted every team after 9 until they had a deal.

3.) We have a half decade's worth of evidence that AKME don't particularly value draft capital.

the extreme skepticism is because the team picking directly ahead of us made a trade down for future draft capital that was a worse return than what the hawks got at 13. that is hard to square with the idea that the pelicans unprotected first was actively being offered to every one of the teams dumars called at 9-12, and it invites at least *some* doubt that he was even willing to put it on the table prior to engaging with atlanta

They heavily scouted Yang for two years. Every mock I saw had him going in the 2nd round. He was such a reach that the only explanation is that they felt they couldn't risk not getting him/that someone else had an eye on him.

[nomorezorro]

i'm sorry, you think "the blazers simply must have been worried about a projected second rounder going off the board before their pick, and they were totally comfortable with dropping down to 16, but thought moving down to 23 was unacceptably risky" is the *only* explanation for what happened?

[HomoSapien]

i'm sorry, you think "the blazers simply must have been worried about a projected second rounder going off the board before their pick, and they were totally comfortable with dropping down to 16, but thought moving down to 23 was unacceptably risky" is the *only* explanation for what happened?

Obviously I am speaking colloquially as humans tend to do. Of course there are other possible explanations. But I believe that it was such a huge reach, that it's clear they were irrationally infatuated with him. That’s what was driving them there. They believed so much in his potential that it was more important to get him than leave a window open for someone else to take him. Cronin has already admitted that they new they would be criticized for the pick, but I think his quotes support my theory:

“For us, it was too important to get him,” Cronin said. “We decided to do what some would call a reach. We decided to take that swing. … It shows what we thought of him.”

[Red Larrivee]

I still don't understand the extreme skepticism here:

1.) Eversely said they spoke to a team(s) about trading down.

2.) Dumars said they contacted every team after 9 until they had a deal.

3.) We have a half decade's worth of evidence that AKME don't particularly value draft capital.

I don't think any of us are saying it 100% didn't happen. We're saying that based on what is factually known, there is no way to say for certain that it did happen.

[DuckIII]

I still don't understand the extreme skepticism here:

1.) Eversely said they spoke to a team(s) about trading down.

2.) Dumars said they contacted every team after 9 until they had a deal.

3.) We have a half decade's worth of evidence that AKME don't particularly value draft capital.

I don't think any of us are saying it 100% didn't happen. We're saying that based on what is factually known, there is no way to say for certain that it did happen.

And I'll take it further. I can't even say it certainly "most likely" happened. The Pels certainly could have offered the same deal to the Bulls (which, I don't care that we declined, if true). Its logical to believe it could have gone down that way. Its not logical to believe it must have, as there is a very reasonable counter-explanation, based on legitimate evidence, that you guys have raised in this thread.

[DuckIII]

Cronin has already admitted that they new they would be criticized for the pick, but I think his quotes support my theory:

“For us, it was too important to get him,” Cronin said. “We decided to do what some would call a reach. We decided to take that swing. … It shows what we thought of him.”

That also equally supports that their strong desire to get him caused them to suddenly enhance their offer to Atlanta, believing they may be down to their last chance to get him.

The fact that the Pels specifically wanted Queen equally supports both possibilities.

[dougthonus]

I think the doesn't apply scenario would make way more sense if there is some evidence of it. Like is anyone, anywhere suggesting it? Is Portland saying we couldn't have this deal? Is any Chicago media leaking we couldn't have this deal?

You said this earlier. Lets use Occam's Razor where it would really apply. Which is more likely:

(a) A team who drafts a guy, and then publicly announces that they'd have rather done something different if a particular trade were on the table, is effectively publicly **** on the rookie drafted while he walks in the door and sending the message to the fan base that the organization would prefer they had not drafted him.

(b) A team drafts a guy, focuses on the guy they drafted to support him and excite the fan base, and says nothing at all about a trade they would have rather executed instead.

Only the most idiotic organization with no concept at all for how PR works would do option (a). The absence of a statement that the deal was not offered fails the Occam's Razer principle pretty dramatically.

I think there are way more options than a and b. Like any single person in the draft room familiar with the situation making an off hand comment to a reporter about it is highly likely, toss up that same rationale to 4 different front offices and it becomes quite likely. Portland probably has a tangible reason to say they didn't have that offer given they actually traded their pick whether directly or via media leak.

Maybe in fact that news will happen in the next few days or has happened already as I am not following Portland's news cycle and am traveling in an airport so barely following the Bulls news cycle.