Would you be open to dealing #6 for....

JMillott · Post #21 » by **JMillott** » Sun Jun 7, 2009 6:36 am

Ojmayo wrote:Replace Gay with Mayo and I'm good.

I'd rather have Gay then Mayo. I think Gay has Granger type upside but more slashing then shooting.

Mayo over dribbles and is more jump shooter then scorer. He also lacks Gay's physical advantages be it size, length or elite athletic ability.

Esohny · Post #22 » by **Esohny** » Sun Jun 7, 2009 6:40 am

I'd like Green more than Gay OR Mayo.

john2jer · Post #23 » by **john2jer** » Sun Jun 7, 2009 3:08 pm

For what it's worth, if you dive into the "advanced stats", Green's team produced better and "won" more when Green was on the bench than when he was on the court.

Post #24 » by **revprodeji** » Sun Jun 7, 2009 4:55 pm

one of the common league facts is that durant and green cannot play together long term. durant is much more effective as a sf then sg and green is better as a sf than pf. I could see okc moving green to balance out the roster. switching green back to sf longterm will be very fruitful for him and the team that brings him in. it would give okc a chance to take hill if they want a longterm pf

JMillott · Post #25 » by **JMillott** » Sun Jun 7, 2009 7:11 pm

revprodeji wrote:one of the common league facts is that durant and green cannot play together long term. durant is much more effective as a sf then sg and green is better as a sf than pf. I could see okc moving green to balance out the roster. switching green back to sf longterm will be very fruitful for him and the team that brings him in. it would give okc a chance to take hill if they want a longterm pf

It would also give either team the assets to deal with the Clippers for Blake Griffin.

shrink · Post #26 » by **shrink** » Sun Jun 7, 2009 11:55 pm

Yes for Green. I believe he can play the 3.

No for Gay. He may be a comparable player, but he's a free agent next season. If we want him, he's the type of player we may be able to draw out of free agency, while we keep the #6.

JMillott · Post #27 » by **JMillott** » Mon Jun 8, 2009 9:28 pm

shrink wrote:Yes for Green. I believe he can play the 3.

No for Gay. He may be a comparable player, but he's a free agent next season. If we want him, he's the type of player we may be able to draw out of free agency, while we keep the #6.

He is also able to sign an extension this summer which could keep his price down and remove the doubt. A known asset of that quality at a position of need locked up who addresses the need for athletic ability, slashing, shooting and would turn both Mike Miller and Ryan Gomes into completely expendable assets.

Post #28 » by **revprodeji** » Mon Jun 8, 2009 9:48 pm

lets throw some other names out there. ignoring whether or not they are looking to trade the guy, just trying to gauge value.

nick young
thad young
anthony randolph
josh smith
prince
augustin
bynum
conley+something

packaged maybe for
d.williams
t. parker

just throwing more straight up names

B Calrissian · Post #29 » by **B Calrissian** » Mon Jun 8, 2009 9:50 pm

Rev, Nick Young seems really out of place on that list.

JMillott · Post #30 » by **JMillott** » Mon Jun 8, 2009 10:08 pm

I'd give up the pick for Thad Young in a heartbeat, if he was in this draft I think he'd go 1st even over Griffin.

younggunsmn · Post #31 » by **younggunsmn** » Mon Jun 8, 2009 10:58 pm

Trade foye for gay.... oh wait we passed on gay for foye.... darn.

Gay is too close to expiring (or a big payday) and green unproven and played out of position last year.
I would rather add a piece this year (preferably a point guard) and give corey brewer one year to see if he's figured it out.

If we trade #6 for an established player over 25 I don't think I can stomach following this team anymore.

Thad Young is a physical beast who's had a few big games, but I don't think he's shown he's consistent enough to put in the leauge of a rudy gay yet. He disappeared in a lot of games last year.

Post #32 » by **revprodeji** » Mon Jun 8, 2009 11:31 pm

nick young is a very underrated prospect.

Krapinsky · Post #33 » by **Krapinsky** » Tue Jun 9, 2009 3:18 am

Gay is a chucker. Pass for now, but maybe in 3 years when he starts getting his act together.

Green for #6 I would have to do. He's just too good a fit for our team.

shrink · Post #34 » by **shrink** » Tue Jun 9, 2009 3:33 am

JMillott wrote:
shrink wrote:Yes for Green. I believe he can play the 3.

No for Gay. He may be a comparable player, but he's a free agent next season. If we want him, he's the type of player we may be able to draw out of free agency, while we keep the #6.

He is also able to sign an extension this summer which could keep his price down and remove the doubt. A known asset of that quality at a position of need locked up who addresses the need for athletic ability, slashing, shooting and would turn both Mike Miller and Ryan Gomes into completely expendable assets.

While its true he could be locked up, that is certainly no guarantee given the circumstances.

First, MEM is a small-market team who needs to be critically aware of their finances.

Second, OJ Mayo and Gay did not play well together, and the team is clearly more attached to OJ for the future.

Third, supposedly part of #2 was that MEM's coach did not like Gay, and didn't want to run many plays for him.

Anyway, I still believe that we may be able to simply acquire Gay as a free agent, so I'd prefer to take the bird-in-the-hand and keep the #6.

B Calrissian · Post #35 » by **B Calrissian** » Tue Jun 9, 2009 4:41 am

revprodeji wrote:nick young is a very underrated prospect.

That may be true but do you think he could be traded for any of those other players you listed?

*Also I don't think Randolph, Bynum, or Thad Young should be on the list.

Tirion · Post #36 » by **Tirion** » Tue Jun 9, 2009 2:14 pm

JMillott wrote:I would like to hear why some of you would say yes to Green but no to Gay?

Maybe cause they like the money, but don't like being **** in the ass?

Tirion · Post #37 » by **Tirion** » Tue Jun 9, 2009 2:19 pm

Gay would be a great compliment to Love. Together they would create an amazing inside-outside combo.

invno1 · Post #38 » by **invno1** » Tue Jun 9, 2009 2:32 pm

Green over Gay or Williams at this spot for me. Just that move would change alot, Green has a very nice game.

Post #39 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Jun 9, 2009 5:32 pm

B Calrissian wrote:
revprodeji wrote:nick young is a very underrated prospect.

That may be true but do you think he could be traded for any of those other players you listed?

*Also I don't think Randolph, Bynum, or Thad Young should be on the list.

I was giving myself a little wiggle room on both sides of the value. i did not put Lebron or Landry, but you could debate those guys.

Bynum has a nasty contract considering his lack of production, he is hardly unmovable.
Randolph is still a prospect, and you never know hat Nellie is thinking.
Thad young is hardly the perfect Jordan/princeton player. Never know.

Not saying these guys would not be traded, but just gauging a value thing. To be fair I said I was not taking that team's desire into consideration. Just gauging value.

Dewey · Post #40 » by **Dewey** » Tue Jun 9, 2009 7:06 pm

Would be great to package Gomes ... he just does not bring enough energy on a consistent basis. We clearly need to find a way to get him moved or into a reserve role.

Maybe a Gomes/#6 or Gomes/#18 is the ticket to getting a better fit ... with Foye, Love and Jefferson, we need more speed from the rest of the guys on the roster.