Rumors, Random Thoughts, Not Thread Worthy, Etc The 24 Second Clock

[mademan]

Ya if you take Sheppard out, maybe the Rockets can justify it. Still almost certainly a no without added assets, which Bucks shouldnt do

[MoreyWins]

Sheppard could be replaced with Clint. Personally, I'm down on Sheppard. I'd rather give Rollins all of his minutes.

[LarsV8]

Sengun/FVV/Capela
for
Turner/Herro/Rollins

Bucks get an all star locked up long term fairly cheaply. Rockets balance their roster and get better shooters.

Rollins / Reed
Amen / Smart
Durant / Herro
Jabari / Eason
Turner / Adams

[MoreyWins]

The Rockets' defense with Sengun off and Amen on has a rating of 105. They're +11 in those minutes. The lineups are great guarding the three point line, great at contesting at the rim, and they force more mid range jumpers. Sengun's lineups without Amen bleed points like crazy in comparison. The offense is about the same with either guy on-or-off. I'd like to see the Rockets lean into what works and build on that. If Steven Adams or Clint Capela level rim protectors are that impactful in the scheme then maybe invest in a guy like that who can play big minutes.

[jbk1234]

Garland for Green, 2027 UTA/MIN/CLE 1st (worst), 2029 UTA/MIN/CLE/CHA 1st (worst)

The worst-of qualifier makes those picks very unlikely to be any good. I just don't see the Clippers preemptively blowing it up and holding a fire sale. If they start off 10-20, maybe they re-evaluate, or would re-evaluate if their entire front office wasn't suspended, but outside of clearing out bad contracts, there's no incentive to deliberately put yourself into bottom 5 territory anymore.

My thought is that a team anchored by Garland + Ingram in the West is probably a 30 win team (maybe a little less or more) and that they are better off just trading their core that has no future for assets that can help them either once they sign a bunch of free agents, or in 8 years when they have their own picks. I don't think there is much value for Garland available, and yah, the worst of qualifiers suck, but we are also about to have some deep drafts because players getting paid NIL will have finally normalized (i.e., a bunch of upperclassmen who would have otherwise declared before NIL are now about to graduate, so there should be a flood of first round caliber guys in the next two drafts, IMO --- 2027 is not great up top, but it looks incredibly deep to me).

And just like they don't have incentive to be bad, they also don't really have incentive to NOT be horrible. They don't own their picks, being awful lowers the value of the picks they don't own (so, who cares?) and they really should be in asset accumulation mode. If Green shows something (he won't) then they might be able to flip him, or he might contribute as much to winning as say ... Ingram (again, this won't happen, but you can see the logic of it if you were high on him).

There' are aways incentive not be to horrible. Horrible teams get less for players in trades. Horrible teams have a more difficult time attracting free agents. Horrible teams have a hard time selling tickets. Horrible teams can have a more difficult time developing players. There was only one incentive when it came to being horrible and not only is gone, but the Clippers who still own their pick in 28, have a very strong incentive not to draft in the top 3 next summer.

Then you get into if Garland stays healthy and has another all star season, is that really the best the Clippers can get for him? Why resign yourself to selling low and being horrible before you've even seen what you have?

[gswhoops]

I know we've had a rockets fan on here saying that a few younger guys on big deals, like Mobley, were already bad contracts because of one flaw or another. I wonder if Amen's shooting inability will have him feel the same, or if that tune will change.

I predict the verdict will be "the 10 million difference in their deals makes Amen a reasonable value deal while Mobley is a ginormous albatross."

Good luck with those Mobley/Mitchell deals.

I’d rather have Spida and Mobley than Amen and Sengun on their current deals

[LarsV8]

I predict the verdict will be "the 10 million difference in their deals makes Amen a reasonable value deal while Mobley is a ginormous albatross."

Good luck with those Mobley/Mitchell deals.

I’d rather have Spida and Mobley than Amen and Sengun on their current deals

Let's revisit in two years.

[HornetJail]

Good luck with those Mobley/Mitchell deals.

I’d rather have Spida and Mobley than Amen and Sengun on their current deals

Let's revisit in two years.

the only realistic ways I see this being a conversation in two years is if Donovan Mitchell completely falls off between ages 30 and 32 or Amen somehow finds a workable outside shot

not impossible I guess, but neither is exactly something I'd bank on.

[Godaddycurse]

I’d rather have Spida and Mobley than Amen and Sengun on their current deals

Let's revisit in two years.

the only realistic ways I see this being a conversation in two years is if Donovan Mitchell completely falls off between ages 30 and 32 or Amen somehow finds a workable outside shot

not impossible I guess, but neither is exactly something I'd bank on.

Mobley doesn't exactly have the most reliable outside shot/FT% either though. I would probably prefer Amen over Mobley on their respective contracts

[tester551]

Can a non-Rockets or non-Bucks fan tell me what they would think about a straight up trade of:

Ryan Rollins, Myles Turner, and AJ Green for Alperen Sengun and Reed Sheppard

Are the values close to equal, and if not which side would have add extra?

Value favors the Bucks. Sengun is a much better player than Turner and neither Rollins nor Green hold any meaningful value to close that gap.

Agreed.
It's not particularly close IMO.

[MoreyWins]

Can a non-Rockets or non-Bucks fan tell me what they would think about a straight up trade of:

Ryan Rollins, Myles Turner, and AJ Green for Alperen Sengun and Reed Sheppard

Are the values close to equal, and if not which side would have add extra?

Value favors the Bucks. Sengun is a much better player than Turner and neither Rollins nor Green hold any meaningful value to close that gap.

Agreed.
It's not particularly close IMO.

What if Capela is inserted for Reed and Milwaukee sends one or two of their worse available picks?

My goal is for the Rockets to obtain a rim protector, volume shooting, and a backcourt creator that's not a liability on defense. The purpose is to tailor the team to something that fits stylistically, gives Amen a opportunity to scale up his on-ball creation, and limits the defensive weaknesses of the team.

I'd assume Milwaukee wouldn't have a problem attaching minimal assets for an upside upgrade. They can get rid of their backcourt clutter and have a direction on how they can build the next iteration of Bucks basketball without their own draft picks.

[HornetJail]

Let's revisit in two years.

the only realistic ways I see this being a conversation in two years is if Donovan Mitchell completely falls off between ages 30 and 32 or Amen somehow finds a workable outside shot

not impossible I guess, but neither is exactly something I'd bank on.

Mobley doesn't exactly have the most reliable outside shot/FT% either though. I would probably prefer Amen over Mobley on their respective contracts

that's significantly more workable from a PF/C than it is from someone you hope is a primary ball handler

[gswhoops]

the only realistic ways I see this being a conversation in two years is if Donovan Mitchell completely falls off between ages 30 and 32 or Amen somehow finds a workable outside shot

not impossible I guess, but neither is exactly something I'd bank on.

Mobley doesn't exactly have the most reliable outside shot/FT% either though. I would probably prefer Amen over Mobley on their respective contracts

that's significantly more workable from a PF/C than it is from someone you hope is a primary ball handler

Yeah it's kind of odd in this context to compare Mobley and Amen, since each duo is a primary ball handler (Spida/Amen) and a big man (Mobley/Sengun); for my money, Cleveland has the better of both.

[Godaddycurse]

Mobley doesn't exactly have the most reliable outside shot/FT% either though. I would probably prefer Amen over Mobley on their respective contracts

that's significantly more workable from a PF/C than it is from someone you hope is a primary ball handler

Yeah it's kind of odd in this context to compare Mobley and Amen, since each duo is a primary ball handler (Spida/Amen) and a big man (Mobley/Sengun); for my money, Cleveland has the better of both.

I dont think Amen should be lead ball handler and is better off as a roll man/cutter/connective piece on Offense. He was forced to be the ball handler w/ the lack of PG on rocket's roster last year.

[jayjaysee]

In 2-3 years, Mitchell might be declining. But he’ll still have most likely spent 2-3 years as the best player in the group..

[babyjax13]

The worst-of qualifier makes those picks very unlikely to be any good. I just don't see the Clippers preemptively blowing it up and holding a fire sale. If they start off 10-20, maybe they re-evaluate, or would re-evaluate if their entire front office wasn't suspended, but outside of clearing out bad contracts, there's no incentive to deliberately put yourself into bottom 5 territory anymore.

My thought is that a team anchored by Garland + Ingram in the West is probably a 30 win team (maybe a little less or more) and that they are better off just trading their core that has no future for assets that can help them either once they sign a bunch of free agents, or in 8 years when they have their own picks. I don't think there is much value for Garland available, and yah, the worst of qualifiers suck, but we are also about to have some deep drafts because players getting paid NIL will have finally normalized (i.e., a bunch of upperclassmen who would have otherwise declared before NIL are now about to graduate, so there should be a flood of first round caliber guys in the next two drafts, IMO --- 2027 is not great up top, but it looks incredibly deep to me).

And just like they don't have incentive to be bad, they also don't really have incentive to NOT be horrible. They don't own their picks, being awful lowers the value of the picks they don't own (so, who cares?) and they really should be in asset accumulation mode. If Green shows something (he won't) then they might be able to flip him, or he might contribute as much to winning as say ... Ingram (again, this won't happen, but you can see the logic of it if you were high on him).

There' are aways incentive not be to horrible. Horrible teams get less for players in trades. Horrible teams have a more difficult time attracting free agents. Horrible teams have a hard time selling tickets. Horrible teams can have a more difficult time developing players. There was only one incentive when it came to being horrible and not only is gone, but the Clippers who still own their pick in 28, have a very strong incentive not to draft in the top 3 next summer.

Then you get into if Garland stays healthy and has another all star season, is that really the best the Clippers can get for him? Why resign yourself to selling low and being horrible before you've even seen what you have?

LAC doesn't own their 2028 pick. They lose it outright if it is 16 or later, and if it is earlier they get the lowest of SAS/LAC/BOS. The Clippers will already have all of those struggles, what matters is which route is the best way out of their current predicament. Holding onto Garland and Ingram for the next 5-7 years to win 30-35 games a year isn't that route, IMO. The route is flipping everything they can for as many assets as they can get until they have the kind of asset base that they can build from.

[jayjaysee]

Value favors the Bucks. Sengun is a much better player than Turner and neither Rollins nor Green hold any meaningful value to close that gap.

Agreed.
It's not particularly close IMO.

What if Capela is inserted for Reed and Milwaukee sends one or two of their worse available picks?

My goal is for the Rockets to obtain a rim protector, volume shooting, and a backcourt creator that's not a liability on defense. The purpose is to tailor the team to something that fits stylistically, gives Amen a opportunity to scale up his on-ball creation, and limits the defensive weaknesses of the team.

I'd assume Milwaukee wouldn't have a problem attaching minimal assets for an upside upgrade. They can get rid of their backcourt clutter and have a direction on how they can build the next iteration of Bucks basketball without their own draft picks.

I don’t see Milwaukee being interested in adding picks.

Seems like Sengun ending up on a third team and Mil getting a late projected first for Turner would be better for them in your idea. Milwaukee should aim for relegation this year versus getting Sengun and finishing in the 5-8 range..

[jbk1234]

My thought is that a team anchored by Garland + Ingram in the West is probably a 30 win team (maybe a little less or more) and that they are better off just trading their core that has no future for assets that can help them either once they sign a bunch of free agents, or in 8 years when they have their own picks. I don't think there is much value for Garland available, and yah, the worst of qualifiers suck, but we are also about to have some deep drafts because players getting paid NIL will have finally normalized (i.e., a bunch of upperclassmen who would have otherwise declared before NIL are now about to graduate, so there should be a flood of first round caliber guys in the next two drafts, IMO --- 2027 is not great up top, but it looks incredibly deep to me).

And just like they don't have incentive to be bad, they also don't really have incentive to NOT be horrible. They don't own their picks, being awful lowers the value of the picks they don't own (so, who cares?) and they really should be in asset accumulation mode. If Green shows something (he won't) then they might be able to flip him, or he might contribute as much to winning as say ... Ingram (again, this won't happen, but you can see the logic of it if you were high on him).

There' are aways incentive not be to horrible. Horrible teams get less for players in trades. Horrible teams have a more difficult time attracting free agents. Horrible teams have a hard time selling tickets. Horrible teams can have a more difficult time developing players. There was only one incentive when it came to being horrible and not only is gone, but the Clippers who still own their pick in 28, have a very strong incentive not to draft in the top 3 next summer.

Then you get into if Garland stays healthy and has another all star season, is that really the best the Clippers can get for him? Why resign yourself to selling low and being horrible before you've even seen what you have?

LAC doesn't own their 2028 pick. They lose it outright if it is 16 or later, and if it is earlier they get the lowest of SAS/LAC/BOS. The Clippers will already have all of those struggles, what matters is which route is the best way out of their current predicament. Holding onto Garland and Ingram for the next 5-7 years to win 30-35 games a year isn't that route, IMO. The route is flipping everything they can for as many assets as they can get until they have the kind of asset base that they can build from.

There's a great deal of distance between holding onto Garland and Ingram for 5-7 years and seeing what their team looks like for at least half a season. It doesn't make sense for the Clippers to deliberately bottom out without their picks unless they get an offer that's too good to turn down like with Zubac (and even that deal looks different after the NBA came in and saying I'll take that with regard to the Pacers pick). There's just no reason to sell low right now.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Philly chip incoming

Read on Twitter

[MoreyWins]

Agreed.
It's not particularly close IMO.

What if Capela is inserted for Reed and Milwaukee sends one or two of their worse available picks?

My goal is for the Rockets to obtain a rim protector, volume shooting, and a backcourt creator that's not a liability on defense. The purpose is to tailor the team to something that fits stylistically, gives Amen a opportunity to scale up his on-ball creation, and limits the defensive weaknesses of the team.

I'd assume Milwaukee wouldn't have a problem attaching minimal assets for an upside upgrade. They can get rid of their backcourt clutter and have a direction on how they can build the next iteration of Bucks basketball without their own draft picks.

I don’t see Milwaukee being interested in adding picks.

Seems like Sengun ending up on a third team and Mil getting a late projected first for Turner would be better for them in your idea. Milwaukee should aim for relegation this year versus getting Sengun and finishing in the 5-8 range..

I may be mistaken, but I when I look at Milwaukee's future draft assets they don't own their own pick for the next few years. In that position, wouldn't it make sense to swing for an under-25 All-Star that has room to improve? The Bucks have the offensive pieces to optimize Sengun's game better than the Rockets.