Would you do this trade with OKC this summer?

KD_Stan · Post #1 » by **KD_Stan** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 6:37 pm

Stuckey
Afflalo
Maxiell

for

Westbrook
late 1st rd pick
Watson (who will be able to contribute right away, and his $6 million salary expires after next season)

KD_Stan · Post #2 » by **KD_Stan** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 6:38 pm

Also, for those that wouldn't do it, what would it take to sweeten the deal outside of KD and Green?

Post #3 » by **theBigLip** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 6:40 pm

Sorry, but we're rebuilding as well, and you took the only two guys we'd be interested in. Afflalo and Maxiell could possibly be traded, but I really doubt Stuckey is going to get traded.

coolness · Post #4 » by **coolness** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:59 pm

KD_Stan wrote:Also, for those that wouldn't do it, what would it take to sweeten the deal outside of KD and Green?

I thought it was a pretty well thought out trade. If Phoenix's 2010 1st were in and OKC's 2nd rounder, then it would be simple for the Pistons.

How bout we take out Afflalo and insert Rip? You guys have the money. Don't act like you don't.

Bosanac · Post #5 » by **Bosanac** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:13 pm

No. If we were to trade Stuckey, I'd want one of your two best players in return. Honestly, we wouldn't be good trading partners because we're both in the same predicament.

Latinoking90 · Post #6 » by **Latinoking90** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:14 pm

It would have to be the lottery pick, although Westbrook is more of a PG then Stuckey has been.

vege · Post #7 » by **vege** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:59 pm

No chance i would do any deal involving Stuckey. Especially for a worse player (westbrook) a crap pick who wouldn't bring us any player worth the rooster spot and a expensive crap backup for 2 serviceable players.
I wouldn't do Stuckey for Westbrook + a lotto pick. Let alone remove the lotto pick and add Max + Afflalo for Watson and a crap pick who is worth a lot less than a 2nd this year.

Post #8 » by **Snakebites** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:07 pm

vege wrote:I wouldn't do Stuckey for Westbrook + a lotto pick.

You're crazy.

Stuckey is a good young player, but he's not Jesus.

The homerism for our own prospects is a bit of a tradition around here, but that doesn't make a post like this any less silly.

The original proposal isn't horrific, but it does fall short and there isn't really much besides the two untouchables to make it worth our while.

vege · Post #9 » by **vege** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:25 pm

Sure call me crazy. People called me crazy when i started blaming Michael Curry for our losses. I don't mind. I wouldn't trade a young 6'5" PG unless it's for something insane.

KD_Stan · Post #10 » by **KD_Stan** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:04 pm

So vere,

You mean to tell me you're turning down Stuckey for lets say westbrook/griffin, or westbrook/thabeet, or westbrook/harden?

WOW!

Not that we'd offer that.

HeroicKennedy · Post #11 » by **HeroicKennedy** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:15 pm

I'm kind of with vege here, and it has nothing to do with overrating Stuckey as much as I'm not super high on Westbrook and Griffin/Thabeet/Harden.

Any other draft, and I think those guys are borderline lottery picks (10-14) as opposed to 1/2/3.

coolness · Post #12 » by **coolness** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:29 pm

I thought Westbrook was a defensive freak with some offense. And he is 2 years younger than Stuckey.

I wouldn't know who to choose. We don't have much data to go on.

vege · Post #13 » by **vege** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:56 pm

KD_Stan wrote:So vere,

You mean to tell me you're turning down Stuckey for lets say westbrook/griffin, or westbrook/thabeet, or westbrook/harden?

WOW!

Not that we'd offer that.

Westbrook + griffin sure. But i wouldn't trade Stuckey for westbrook + thabeet or harden. And OKC wouldn't trade Griffin for god since he is from okc.
I am 100% sure we can get chandler for kwame if we want. And i don't think Thabeet will be a whole lot better than Chandler. We might be able to get Kaman without give up much value and i have no doubt Kaman is better than Thabeet.

Thabeet seems nice but to make a comparison Roy Hibbert had better numbers than Thabeet. And so far he is nothing more than a passable center. Hibbert have potential potential. Sure. But Stuckey is possible an all star next season. And he is a 6'5" 200+ lbs PG you won't find any other PG that big in the league.

zeebneeb · Post #14 » by **zeebneeb** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:56 pm

Pistons#1 wrote:
vege wrote:I wouldn't do Stuckey for Westbrook + a lotto pick.

You're crazy.

Stuckey is a good young player, but he's not Jesus.

The homerism for our own prospects is a bit of a tradition around here, but that doesn't make a post like this any less silly.

The original proposal isn't horrific, but it does fall short and there isn't really much besides the two untouchables to make it worth our while.

Stuckey is NOT just a good young player. You know that. He's currently the biggest PG in the league, and its only his first year of starting. Shipping him out would be akin to what Boston did to Billups, dumb as hell. I mean dumb as hell.

This board also has a tradition around here of undervaluing our players as well, and that seems to be the case with Stuckey lately. There is no way in hell, I would trade the biggest PG in the league, with his skillset, and raging upside, unless its for another hell of a PG in return. You just cant do it. Trading him for westbrook and a lotto pick is not even close to bieng on the table bro, c'mon now.

I know the rest of this season is just going to flat-out suck, but lets not get all crazy on what are guys are worth, one way or the other.

I honestly feel that the ONLY players on our team that have almost ZERO likely-hood of bieng traded are Stuckey, and either RIP/Prince for stability when next year starts(Experinced players always help a younger gaurd like Stuckey)

This also keeps with Joes philosephy of not only maintaining a winning team, but getting better as time goes on. Trading Stuckey for that, would be the ultimate blow-up job. If I remember correctly, Joe just stated recently that this is Stcukeys team to run, and Stuckey's development also allowed us to move Billups for an expiring Iverson.

A MASSIVE deal would have to be offered up for Joe to move Stuckey at this point, and I just dont see that happening, seeing as how it is the toughest sopt to fill in the NBA, and giving up the biggest PG in the league, seems incredibly short-sighted.

He Filled it Up · Post #15 » by **He Filled it Up** » Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:49 pm

^ I agree, not that the trade is horrible, but that we can't panic and trade the future away.

Warspite · Post #16 » by **Warspite** » Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:12 am

We have to get back the other teams best player if we are trading Stuckey. Im not sure Green is good enough to get Stuckey.

If we traded away our best player to create room to build around Stuckey then to trade Stuckey we have to get all NBA 1st team type player.

GJense4181 · Post #17 » by **GJense4181** » Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:13 am

How is anybody NOT sold on Griffin?
I would swap Stuckey for him in a HEARTBEAT.

Kyrama · Post #18 » by **Kyrama** » Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:21 am

GJense4181 wrote:How is anybody NOT sold on Griffin?
I would swap Stuckey for him in a HEARTBEAT.

Truth. He'll be like Amare. And Westbrook will be something special too. OKC has a bright future.

Post #19 » by **Snakebites** » Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:23 am

zeebneeb wrote:
Pistons#1 wrote:
vege wrote:I wouldn't do Stuckey for Westbrook + a lotto pick.

You're crazy.

Stuckey is a good young player, but he's not Jesus.

The homerism for our own prospects is a bit of a tradition around here, but that doesn't make a post like this any less silly.

The original proposal isn't horrific, but it does fall short and there isn't really much besides the two untouchables to make it worth our while.
Stuckey is NOT just a good young player. You know that. He's currently the biggest PG in the league, and its only his first year of starting. Shipping him out would be akin to what Boston did to Billups, dumb as hell. I mean dumb as hell.

This board also has a tradition around here of undervaluing our players as well, and that seems to be the case with Stuckey lately. There is no way in hell, I would trade the biggest PG in the league, with his skillset, and raging upside, unless its for another hell of a PG in return. You just cant do it. Trading him for westbrook and a lotto pick is not even close to bieng on the table bro, c'mon now.

I know the rest of this season is just going to flat-out suck, but lets not get all crazy on what are guys are worth, one way or the other.

I honestly feel that the ONLY players on our team that have almost ZERO likely-hood of bieng traded are Stuckey, and either RIP/Prince for stability when next year starts(Experinced players always help a younger gaurd like Stuckey)

This also keeps with Joes philosephy of not only maintaining a winning team, but getting better as time goes on. Trading Stuckey for that, would be the ultimate blow-up job. If I remember correctly, Joe just stated recently that this is Stcukeys team to run, and Stuckey's development also allowed us to move Billups for an expiring Iverson.

A MASSIVE deal would have to be offered up for Joe to move Stuckey at this point, and I just dont see that happening, seeing as how it is the toughest sopt to fill in the NBA, and giving up the biggest PG in the league, seems incredibly short-sighted.

Good young player was an understatement on my part. Make no mistake, I DO value Stuckey very highly (I would never trade him for Westbrook, even with my UCLA bias playing into it).

Boston with Billups isn't exactly a fair comparison. They dealt him for KENNY ANDERSON, one of the most disappointing players of the 90's. Had they had the chance to grap two great prospects for the price of one, they'd have done it in a heartbeat, as would any team. Its moot, though, as the Thunder wouldn't offer that.

Stuckey is valuable, but not infinitely valuable. He is more valuable than anything another team would REALISTICALLY offer, though, which is why we'd never (and should never) deal him.

Liqourish · Post #20 » by **Liqourish** » Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:33 am

Stuckey/Afflalo/Maxiell for Westbrook/late 1st, I wouldn't do. Stuckey for Westbrook and a top 3 pick, hell yeah I would do. I really like Stuck, but damn, if you can get a solid PG to replace your solid PG and a top pick, you do it.

The problem with the original proposal is that we are giving up 3 of our top youth prospects, for your third best youth prospect and a late pick. I like Westbrook, but I don't think he's worth Stuckey/Afflalo/Maxiell. And the difference isn't a late 1st.