#11 Pick Value
Moderator: THE J0KER
#11 Pick Value
-
- Junior
- Posts: 351
- And1: 47
- Joined: Aug 24, 2013
- Location: Boulder, CO
-
#11 Pick Value
Denver
What player is worthy of a straight up trade for the 11th overall?
Denver obviously would like a vet. I agree.
Lets debate.
What player is worthy of a straight up trade for the 11th overall?
Denver obviously would like a vet. I agree.
Lets debate.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Junior
- Posts: 320
- And1: 25
- Joined: Jul 06, 2013
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
Eric gordan and josh smith? Seriously! Eric and smith arnt valued very highly. Especially not for a lottery pick.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 25,186
- And1: 11,359
- Joined: Mar 05, 2005
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
Agreed Gordon and Smith are not worth the 11th overall pick with their contracts, also I do not see the Nuggets turning around and trading the 11th for Afflalo, to much pride in Kroenke to admit how bad of a mistake it was to do that Iggy deal in the 1st place. I would consider trading for Ross but would want some other benefit than just him, he looks like a solid d and 3 in the future but is not there yet, but if they would take Randolph I would probably do it. Waiters I also do not see fitting in here, he needs the all in his hands and with lawson and Gallo hopefully back and fully healthy plus Robinson off the bench, adn that is not even mentioning his lack of defense. I just do not see where he fits with the team, meaning if you trade for him you have to make some other moves.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 12,968
- And1: 6,114
- Joined: Jun 29, 2009
- Location: Tampa
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
Steve Bulpett
@SteveBHoop
Sources: in addition to Wilson Chandler and Kenneth Faried, Denver offering Minnesota a player they would acquire (Arron Afflalo) for Love.
Sooooooooooo how do you guys think you get AA from us? #11?
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,645
- And1: 3,964
- Joined: Mar 15, 2010
- Location: Undisclosed: MJ's shadow could be lurking....
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 8,571
- And1: 531
- Joined: Mar 05, 2003
- Location: Denver, CO
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
I still don't think the Love deal happens for the Nuggets, but in this scenario, I'd assume so.
Wolves get Faried/Chandler/Afflalo - pieces to remain competitive and not tear it completely down.
Nuggets get Love
Magic get ammo to move into the top 3, or move up from 11+12?
Having lived through this with Melo, there's probably going to be a new team an a new "front-runner" every day until something happens. Still don't see Minnesota shipping Love within the division.
Wolves get Faried/Chandler/Afflalo - pieces to remain competitive and not tear it completely down.
Nuggets get Love
Magic get ammo to move into the top 3, or move up from 11+12?
Having lived through this with Melo, there's probably going to be a new team an a new "front-runner" every day until something happens. Still don't see Minnesota shipping Love within the division.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Junior
- Posts: 351
- And1: 47
- Joined: Aug 24, 2013
- Location: Boulder, CO
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
I don't think Denver pulls off the Love trade either. That said I don't like Gary Harris, Nik Stauskas, Dario Šarić or Zach LaVine all that much either. The rookie contract would look nice with a maxed out cap but I would rather see Denver grab a vet wing. I like Terrance Ross from Toronto.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Junior
- Posts: 320
- And1: 25
- Joined: Jul 06, 2013
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
Do you think phoniex suns would trade 18/14 for 11 and some of our bad contracts? Chandler and hicksen
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 25,186
- And1: 11,359
- Joined: Mar 05, 2005
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
Chandler is not a bad contract, and no I do not think the Suns would give up the 18th and 14th to move up 3 slots and also take on Hickson or even Randolph.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
- Posts: 14,089
- And1: 5,448
- Joined: Jun 02, 2014
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
Do you think PHX would trade 14 & 27 for 11, 56 & Randolph ?
Texas Chuck wrote:I'd like to see Utah, and Denver lose
Exactly as I've been saying all along !!
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 25,186
- And1: 11,359
- Joined: Mar 05, 2005
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
skywalker33 wrote:Do you think PHX would trade 14 & 27 for 11, 56 & Randolph ?
Yes but I do not think the Nuggets would.
I could see the 11th and 1 of the 2nds for the 14th and 18th being pretty close, I could see the 14th and 27th for the 11th and Hickson being close, but I do not see the Nuggets moving down 3 picks for the 27th pick while giving up a 2nd round pick just for $1.8 million in savings.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
- Posts: 14,089
- And1: 5,448
- Joined: Jun 02, 2014
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
The Rebel wrote:skywalker33 wrote:Do you think PHX would trade 14 & 27 for 11, 56 & Randolph ?
Yes but I do not think the Nuggets would.
I could see the 11th and 1 of the 2nds for the 14th and 18th being pretty close, I could see the 14th and 27th for the 11th and Hickson being close, but I do not see the Nuggets moving down 3 picks for the 27th pick while giving up a 2nd round pick just for $1.8 million in savings.
Not just $1.8 in savings, opening up a roster spot, which I consider more important. There has been talk of bringing over Lauvergne this year and AntRand is useless IMO, so an easy roster spot at the right position. The 14th I'd use on LaVine (or on Nurkic or Saric ?) and the 27th pick I'd use on Spencer Dinwiddie, even though I'd love to get him at the 41st, just don't think he'll be there. I know both LaVine and Dinwiddie are similar players, but both have better potential to strengthen and deepen our backcourt. The 41st could give us a big-man stash candidate over in Europe.
Lauvergne give us size as a stretch 4/backup C so this makes it more intruiging to me as well.
Texas Chuck wrote:I'd like to see Utah, and Denver lose
Exactly as I've been saying all along !!
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 25,186
- And1: 11,359
- Joined: Mar 05, 2005
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
skywalker33 wrote:The Rebel wrote:skywalker33 wrote:Do you think PHX would trade 14 & 27 for 11, 56 & Randolph ?
Yes but I do not think the Nuggets would.
I could see the 11th and 1 of the 2nds for the 14th and 18th being pretty close, I could see the 14th and 27th for the 11th and Hickson being close, but I do not see the Nuggets moving down 3 picks for the 27th pick while giving up a 2nd round pick just for $1.8 million in savings.
Not just $1.8 in savings, opening up a roster spot, which I consider more important. There has been talk of bringing over Lauvergne this year and AntRand is useless IMO, so an easy roster spot at the right position. The 14th I'd use on LaVine (or on Nurkic or Saric ?) and the 27th pick I'd use on Spencer Dinwiddie, even though I'd love to get him at the 41st, just don't think he'll be there. I know both LaVine and Dinwiddie are similar players, but both have better potential to strengthen and deepen our backcourt. The 41st could give us a big-man stash candidate over in Europe.
Lauvergne give us size as a stretch 4/backup C so this makes it more intruiging to me as well.
I am not sold on Lavine, I would actually prefer they trade the pick for a guy like afflalo or even Waiters if they could get him, just am not interested in the team getting younger or having to develop more young guys.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
- Posts: 14,089
- And1: 5,448
- Joined: Jun 02, 2014
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
The Rebel wrote:skywalker33 wrote:The Rebel wrote:
Yes but I do not think the Nuggets would.
I could see the 11th and 1 of the 2nds for the 14th and 18th being pretty close, I could see the 14th and 27th for the 11th and Hickson being close, but I do not see the Nuggets moving down 3 picks for the 27th pick while giving up a 2nd round pick just for $1.8 million in savings.
Not just $1.8 in savings, opening up a roster spot, which I consider more important. There has been talk of bringing over Lauvergne this year and AntRand is useless IMO, so an easy rost9+5893+66*-+++++++er spot at the right position. The 14th I'd use on LaVine (or on Nurkic or Saric ?) and the 27th pick I'd use on Spencer-
Dinwiddie, even though I'd love to get him at the 41st, just don't think he'll be there. I know both LaVine and Dinwiddie are similar players, but both have better potential to strengthen and deepen our backcourt. The 41st could give us a big-man stash candidate over in Europe.
Lauvergne give us size as a stretch 4/backup C so this makes it more intruiging to me as well.
I am not sold on Lavine, I would actually prefer they trade the pick for a guy like afflalo or even Waiters if they could get him, just am not interested in the team getting younger or having to develop more young guys.
I can see that, but I feel LaVine has a bit of Reggie Miller in his game, not as good of a shooter, but close and has hutzpah. If he came out next year, I could see a top 7 pick and I'd be willing to gamble. If you have faith in what our healthy roster can do now, he'll have a year to develop within Shaw's system, that growth could be exponential. And I hear Dinwiddie should be back on the court by Aug, he will add size as a combo guard as well (maybe even allow us to trade Robinson for something of value, not real keen on him as a team player).
Texas Chuck wrote:I'd like to see Utah, and Denver lose
Exactly as I've been saying all along !!
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
- Posts: 14,089
- And1: 5,448
- Joined: Jun 02, 2014
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
I like AAA, thought it was a mistake to include him in that trade, but spilled milk and all....while you don't want too much youth, AAA is reaching into his 30's now, does he have much more of a ceiling ? Waiter does have youth, but seems like a headcase and I don't think we need that here. I could see trading WC for him and moving Fours up, but this is our highest pick since 2003 that just happens to be in the deepest draft in years, a mistake trading that opportunity.
I could think about Terrance Ross or DeRozan, like what both bring to the table.
I could think about Terrance Ross or DeRozan, like what both bring to the table.
Texas Chuck wrote:I'd like to see Utah, and Denver lose
Exactly as I've been saying all along !!
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 8,571
- And1: 531
- Joined: Mar 05, 2003
- Location: Denver, CO
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
The Rebel wrote:skywalker33 wrote:The Rebel wrote:
Yes but I do not think the Nuggets would.
I could see the 11th and 1 of the 2nds for the 14th and 18th being pretty close, I could see the 14th and 27th for the 11th and Hickson being close, but I do not see the Nuggets moving down 3 picks for the 27th pick while giving up a 2nd round pick just for $1.8 million in savings.
Not just $1.8 in savings, opening up a roster spot, which I consider more important. There has been talk of bringing over Lauvergne this year and AntRand is useless IMO, so an easy roster spot at the right position. The 14th I'd use on LaVine (or on Nurkic or Saric ?) and the 27th pick I'd use on Spencer Dinwiddie, even though I'd love to get him at the 41st, just don't think he'll be there. I know both LaVine and Dinwiddie are similar players, but both have better potential to strengthen and deepen our backcourt. The 41st could give us a big-man stash candidate over in Europe.
Lauvergne give us size as a stretch 4/backup C so this makes it more intruiging to me as well.
I am not sold on Lavine, I would actually prefer they trade the pick for a guy like afflalo or even Waiters if they could get him, just am not interested in the team getting younger or having to develop more young guys.
I definitely see that side on LaVine. If you don't feel he's going to get there at all, or for several years, I can see why it's a questionable decision. That said, I think this franchise got in real trouble when it started discounting draft picks, or not wanting to put the work or time in to develop young guys. Hitting on draft picks and keeping a consistent stream of rookie talent is especially vital to teams that can't attract top level free agents, which the Nuggets clearly cannot. I think the biggest credit to why this team didn't hit rock bottom after the Melo trade is far less the haul they got in that trade, and far more huge draft hits on Lawson and Faried in the post-lottery picks (I know they didn't actually draft Lawson, but I'm counting it).
I'm going out on a limb now that LaVine will be gone before #11. It feels like he's wowing in every workout he's in, and I saw the Lakers are bringing him in for a second workout. It feels like one of those draft board climbers, for better or worse.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 25,186
- And1: 11,359
- Joined: Mar 05, 2005
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
MHZ wrote:The Rebel wrote:skywalker33 wrote:
Not just $1.8 in savings, opening up a roster spot, which I consider more important. There has been talk of bringing over Lauvergne this year and AntRand is useless IMO, so an easy roster spot at the right position. The 14th I'd use on LaVine (or on Nurkic or Saric ?) and the 27th pick I'd use on Spencer Dinwiddie, even though I'd love to get him at the 41st, just don't think he'll be there. I know both LaVine and Dinwiddie are similar players, but both have better potential to strengthen and deepen our backcourt. The 41st could give us a big-man stash candidate over in Europe.
Lauvergne give us size as a stretch 4/backup C so this makes it more intruiging to me as well.
I am not sold on Lavine, I would actually prefer they trade the pick for a guy like afflalo or even Waiters if they could get him, just am not interested in the team getting younger or having to develop more young guys.
I definitely see that side on LaVine. If you don't feel he's going to get there at all, or for several years, I can see why it's a questionable decision. That said, I think this franchise got in real trouble when it started discounting draft picks, or not wanting to put the work or time in to develop young guys. Hitting on draft picks and keeping a consistent stream of rookie talent is especially vital to teams that can't attract top level free agents, which the Nuggets clearly cannot. I think the biggest credit to why this team didn't hit rock bottom after the Melo trade is far less the haul they got in that trade, and far more huge draft hits on Lawson and Faried in the post-lottery picks (I know they didn't actually draft Lawson, but I'm counting it).
I'm going out on a limb now that LaVine will be gone before #11. It feels like he's wowing in every workout he's in, and I saw the Lakers are bringing him in for a second workout. It feels like one of those draft board climbers, for better or worse.
I agree draft picks are important, however you have to remember the Nuggets finished last season with an average age of 23.77 years old, young teams always struggle especially in the 4th quarter which has been a problem for this team the last few years.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 8,571
- And1: 531
- Joined: Mar 05, 2003
- Location: Denver, CO
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
Well, you may get your wish.
To say this option doesn't excite me would be an understatement. This team is not a veteran addition away from making noise in the west. They're just not.
http://www.denverpost.com/dempsey/ci_26 ... ctions-nba
They could take the "future potential" route with a player such as LaVine, who has the raw talent to be a star but needs a lot of seasoning. Harris is a player who could help the team sooner than later. Ditto with Stauskas and McDermott.
If they go with a player such as LaVine, Stauskas or McDermott, the Nuggets would have no choice but to address their perimeter defensive needs through free agency. And there are good choices out there, so that gives the Nuggets latitude to make a bit of an unorthodox pick knowing a veteran free agent could fill their immediate needs.
Or they could trade the pick for a veteran who fits their roster needs, which appears to be the Nuggets' preference. Whether they can find the right deal is another thing altogether. But each move made elsewhere changes the landscape, possibly then revealing someone the Nuggets could deal for.
To say this option doesn't excite me would be an understatement. This team is not a veteran addition away from making noise in the west. They're just not.
http://www.denverpost.com/dempsey/ci_26 ... ctions-nba
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 25,186
- And1: 11,359
- Joined: Mar 05, 2005
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
One other thing to look at with the Nuggets last year, while Lawson and the bigs all took a step forward outside of Foye all the SG/sfs seemed to take a large step back. I was very disappointed in Fournier, Q Miller, Hamilton, and even Chandler and they way they all played for the most part this season.
Plus I know many are not very high on fournier and Q at this point, but I still think they are both very young and deserve to have the chance to earn minutes for at least 1 more season, adding another rookie with Foye and Gallo makes that impossible as long as they also keep Chandler. And I think it is pretty obvious the last thing the Nuggets need is another PF.
Plus I know many are not very high on fournier and Q at this point, but I still think they are both very young and deserve to have the chance to earn minutes for at least 1 more season, adding another rookie with Foye and Gallo makes that impossible as long as they also keep Chandler. And I think it is pretty obvious the last thing the Nuggets need is another PF.
Re: #11 Pick Value
-
- Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
- Posts: 14,089
- And1: 5,448
- Joined: Jun 02, 2014
-
Re: #11 Pick Value
The Rebel wrote:One other thing to look at with the Nuggets last year, while Lawson and the bigs all took a step forward outside of Foye all the SG/sfs seemed to take a large step back. I was very disappointed in Fournier, Q Miller, Hamilton, and even Chandler and they way they all played for the most part this season.
Plus I know many are not very high on fournier and Q at this point, but I still think they are both very young and deserve to have the chance to earn minutes for at least 1 more season, adding another rookie with Foye and Gallo makes that impossible as long as they also keep Chandler. And I think it is pretty obvious the last thing the Nuggets need is another PF.
I agree with Chandler, showed he was better off as a 6th man, but was put into a tough position in having to start, had some health issues of his own. Quincy showed some improvement with added PT, I saw enough to feel comfortable enough to trade WC this offseason. Fournier was the one who bothered me too. I was hoping for a big step up in his play, he should have been starting over Foye but didn't play up to that level. Sophmore Slump ? I hope so, 1 more year is all I am willing to give him right now.
Texas Chuck wrote:I'd like to see Utah, and Denver lose
Exactly as I've been saying all along !!