Adelman wants a "very aggressive" off season

Narf · Post #281 » by **Narf** » Thu May 3, 2012 5:15 am

Yeah I'm failing to see the downside of a 3 man front court of Noah/Love/Pekovic with Jodie Meeks and whatever SF we can trade for on the wings.

Not that I think Chicago will do it, but many of their fans seem to think Asik is the better C going forward. I was just entertaining the thought that Chicago's front office felt the same way, and was planning on locking Asik up for 5 years to start.

shangrila · Post #282 » by **shangrila** » Thu May 3, 2012 7:59 am

I'm fairly sure 5 year contracts are more or less gone, right? A team can only have one on their roster at a time, IIRC, so giving it to Asik seems a little short sighted (although OKC got a loophole with Westbrook and Durant).

Krapinsky · Post #283 » by **Krapinsky** » Thu May 3, 2012 2:53 pm

Narf wrote:Yeah I'm failing to see the downside of a 3 man front court of Noah/Love/Pekovic with Jodie Meeks and whatever SF we can trade for on the wings.

Not that I think Chicago will do it, but many of their fans seem to think Asik is the better C going forward. I was just entertaining the thought that Chicago's front office felt the same way, and was planning on locking Asik up for 5 years to start.

THe downside is you're starting Jodie Meeks.

Post #284 » by **Worm Guts** » Thu May 3, 2012 2:58 pm

shangrila wrote:Noah is probably Chicago's 2nd best player. I don't think there's any way they'd give him up for Williams and fillers.

Not to mention they already have Boozer and Deng. Williams doesn't make any sense there.

LordBaldric · Post #285 » by **LordBaldric** » Thu May 3, 2012 8:35 pm

shangrila wrote:I'm fairly sure 5 year contracts are more or less gone, right? A team can only have one on their roster at a time, IIRC, so giving it to Asik seems a little short sighted (although OKC got a loophole with Westbrook and Durant).

Chicago already used their 5 year contract on Rose.

Krapinsky · Post #286 » by **Krapinsky** » Thu May 3, 2012 8:40 pm

Five seasons is only for (1) all Bird free agents and (2) players coming off their rookie deal that are signed to the max (limit one 5 season designation per team).

shangrila · Post #287 » by **shangrila** » Thu May 3, 2012 9:09 pm

LordBaldric wrote:
shangrila wrote:I'm fairly sure 5 year contracts are more or less gone, right? A team can only have one on their roster at a time, IIRC, so giving it to Asik seems a little short sighted (although OKC got a loophole with Westbrook and Durant).

Chicago already used their 5 year contract on Rose.

Didn't he sign it before the lockout? I'm not sure if it counts, then. I know Durant had a 5 year deal and then OKC signed Westbrook to one as well.

Post #288 » by **Basti** » Thu May 3, 2012 10:51 pm

Narf wrote:What about Noah for Williams + salary?

I'd do it but Chicago certainly wouldn't unless it's a three team deal.

LordBaldric · Post #289 » by **LordBaldric** » Thu May 3, 2012 11:14 pm

shangrila wrote:
LordBaldric wrote:
shangrila wrote:I'm fairly sure 5 year contracts are more or less gone, right? A team can only have one on their roster at a time, IIRC, so giving it to Asik seems a little short sighted (although OKC got a loophole with Westbrook and Durant).

Chicago already used their 5 year contract on Rose.

Didn't he sign it before the lockout? I'm not sure if it counts, then. I know Durant had a 5 year deal and then OKC signed Westbrook to one as well.

Nope. Rose signed in December. Durant was able to get in because he was in the previous year's draft class.

black bart · Post #290 » by **black bart** » Fri May 4, 2012 12:07 am

How about landry fields. Good size had an 'off season' and gained muscle but lost his shot. Very cheap and young. Actually would be a decent bench player or possible starter at 4 years 16 million. Also has a +5.5 +/-. Was efficient last year and playing out of position (SG instead of SF). Which all could have lowered his stats. Busted shot and new trainer most likely did it.

Post #291 » by **The J Rocka** » Fri May 4, 2012 1:45 am

nhh90 wrote:How about landry fields. Good size had an 'off season' and gained muscle but lost his shot. Very cheap and young. Actually would be a decent bench player or possible starter at 4 years 16 million. Also has a +5.5 +/-. Was efficient last year and playing out of position (SG instead of SF). Which all could have lowered his stats. Busted shot and new trainer most likely did it.

No to Fields. Guy is trash.

Grits n Gravy · Post #292 » by **Grits n Gravy** » Fri May 4, 2012 1:48 am

nhh90 wrote:How about landry fields. Good size had an 'off season' and gained muscle but lost his shot. Very cheap and young. Actually would be a decent bench player or possible starter at 4 years 16 million. Also has a +5.5 +/-. Was efficient last year and playing out of position (SG instead of SF). Which all could have lowered his stats. Busted shot and new trainer most likely did it.

i love fields and would love to have him here...terrific defender & rebounder, very smart..just a true glue guy.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #293 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Fri May 4, 2012 4:17 am

Noah is awesome, but Pekovic is good and he plays a position of need. Replacing him for a possibly better fit isn't a good idea to spend our only asset on.

theGreatRC · Post #294 » by **theGreatRC** » Fri May 4, 2012 4:26 am

The J Rocka wrote:
nhh90 wrote:How about landry fields. Good size had an 'off season' and gained muscle but lost his shot. Very cheap and young. Actually would be a decent bench player or possible starter at 4 years 16 million. Also has a +5.5 +/-. Was efficient last year and playing out of position (SG instead of SF). Which all could have lowered his stats. Busted shot and new trainer most likely did it.

No to Fields. Guy is trash.

Yeah, Fields is Garbo. Thank D'antoni for his success, thank Woodson for revealing his weaknesses.

black bart · Post #295 » by **black bart** » Fri May 4, 2012 6:29 am

theGreatRC wrote:
The J Rocka wrote:
nhh90 wrote:How about landry fields. Good size had an 'off season' and gained muscle but lost his shot. Very cheap and young. Actually would be a decent bench player or possible starter at 4 years 16 million. Also has a +5.5 +/-. Was efficient last year and playing out of position (SG instead of SF). Which all could have lowered his stats. Busted shot and new trainer most likely did it.

No to Fields. Guy is trash.

Yeah, Fields is Garbo. Thank D'antoni for his success, thank Woodson for revealing his weaknesses.

Nah. The main problem with Fields is that he changed his shooting form. Don't ask why. He is basically practicing a new form. It is stupid (why did he do this is beyond me when he was shooting automatic before). But he hasn't gotten used to it yet and will obviously improve. It is a steal to get him cheap at this moment especially the circumstances for his stats are just flat out bad for stupid reasons. I doubt he will not be able to get a contract since every gm probably knows this though.

Oh and he also has a history of improving his game. He averaged 22 points per game his last season at stanford. Iguodala is on a bad contract and landry fields could give better numbers at 14 millino less a year.

rugbyrugger23 · Post #296 » by **rugbyrugger23** » Fri May 4, 2012 7:29 pm

This would be aggressive:
1) Sign Batum to max...4 year deal like Love. Yes over paying slight, but if he performs as expected on Wolves roster, price is slight discount.

2) Trade for Harden...I like many on RGM think Harden is perfect fit next to Rubio as can be traded for with everything OKC has going on dollar wise. Even more so if they don't win it all this year. I would even part with Pek to get Harden...so a Pek/DWill/#18 for Harden/Perkins (or the PHX 3 team trade posted some where on RGM would work too).

3) Resign Beasley for 6th man money. Afterall, he knows the team, scheme, is 23, can score off bench and seems to like MN. I like many on RGM have mixed feelings for the entire BEasy package, but is what it is.

4) Darko...I agree with amnesty but also fine with keeping. His third year isn't guaranteed, and he provides 6 fouls as a 7 footer off the bench.

Roster:
Love-$13.7
Batum-$13.7
Perk-$7.8
Harden-$5.8
Rubio-$3.8

Beasley-$5.0

Darko-$5.2 (possible buyout/amnesty)
JJ-$4.5 (possible trade asset offseason or '13 trade deadline)
Wes-$4.3 (possible trade asset

)
Rid-$4.0
AR or Tolliver-$2.5
Ellington & Lee-$3.0

Total: under $75mil...following year will stay under 80 with Darko gone, and JJ/Rid traded (once Rubio proves back 100% from injury).

LordBaldric · Post #297 » by **LordBaldric** » Fri May 4, 2012 8:17 pm

Repeat after me: Beasley is not going to be brought back.

Dewey · Post #298 » by **Dewey** » Fri May 4, 2012 8:57 pm

LordBaldric wrote:Repeat after me: Beasley is not going to be brought back.

Beasley is not going to be brought back
Beasley is not going to be brought back
Beasley is not going to be brought back

Krapinsky · Post #299 » by **Krapinsky** » Fri May 4, 2012 9:56 pm

Yeah! Le'ts just trade for Harden! Why didn't anybody else think of that?

We comin'!

Post #300 » by **Klomp** » Fri May 4, 2012 10:26 pm

Krapinsky wrote:Yeah! Le'ts just trade for Harden! Why didn't anybody else think of that?

We comin'!

I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but I've been thinking lately about 3-ways with OKC and PHI.

This is what I've come up with so far http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=6mxdnnf PHI would also be getting #18, but I'm still not sure if they get enough.