Moderators: JDR720, Diop, BigSlam, yosemiteben, fatlever
Snidely FC wrote:I woyuld do CHA 9 to BOS for Tyler Zeller + 16 (take whoever is left of Booker, Hunter, Dekker, Grant, Payne, Wright)
Win or lose Herr Zeller Bros would be mad entertainment value.
LofJ wrote:I'm on the boat with everyone saying that trading Zeller to move up 3 spots is too much. For the 6th pick I'd offer the Kings our 9th pick, a Marvin for Landry swap, and a lottery protected 2016 1st. I think that value is fair.
jdm3 wrote:Braggins wrote:jdm3 wrote:Outside of a vacuum Johnson is just as good for us as Hezonja and I would not be surprised at all if Booker was better than Mario in two years anyway. Booker is the most misvalued player on this board.
Both those trades are terrible. I am not giving up Hairston and a future first for Nik and I am not downgrading from Marvin the Landry either. Thompson is what he is and that is almost as good as Zeller now. His perimeter defense is worse than Zeller and he isn't getting better anymore like Zeller. If you trade so much potential you need to get a clear upgrade and I guess that is where we differ. I would put Johnson, Hezonja and Booker on the same level for us. I am fine with any at 9 and I am not giving up talent unless we get Russell.
Really? Johnson fits our needs just as well as Hezonja? We are going to have like 4 million in cap and the mid-level exception at best to improve our shooting outside of our draft selection. If we take Johnson or Booker we are going to go into next season without having improved our shooting at all. Johnson likely won't be any better than Hendo initially and Booker wouldn't see the floor for us in year one. We'll be looking at Johnson(if hes left at 9), Lance, PJ, or whatever we can get with our minimal cap space at SG.
I'm getting the feeling you see Zeller as a future all-star or something. His ceiling is a high end role player. It wouldn't be the end of the world to trade a young role player to move up in the draft. Stauskas was a top 10 pick and has just as much potential as Zeller does. We need shooting more than we need defense. I'm not sure how you see Thompson, Hezonja, Stauskas, as way less value than Zeller, Johnson, mid 1st round pick... I agree the value is slightly in the Kings favor since Zeller is more valuable than Thompson and Hezonja/Johnson and Stauskas/mid 1st pick are basically washes, but the point of the trade is that we give up slight value to improve our biggest weakness (shooting) and get a better fit with our selection this year (I'm sorry, but we need Hezonjas shooting more than Stanleys D). Please explain to me how the value is terrible for us in that exchange.
Why would downgrading Marvin to Landry even matter, and is that even really a downgrade? Vonleh or someone else will have that spot in a year or two, if not next season. Stauskas is worth a mid first pick and PJ is easily worth moving up if we are getting a player that can help us more.
I really don't see how those trades are terrible. I can understand not wanting to do them if you don't think Hezonja is an upgrade over Johnson, but the value isn't too far off either way.
Johnson and Booker both upgrade our shooting and Johnson upgrades our defense as well. Booker is a better shooter right now than Mario IMO. If we take either of them they help us as much if not more than Mario.
They are terrible because you are giving away assets for nothing at all. To me a future first and Hairston have way more value than Nik and Zeller has way more value than Thompson. Not because Zeller is a future all star but just because he already is better at what we need him to do and is still improving. Moving from 9 to 6 is worthless because Mario is no better than the other guys. So for me you trades are just sending out assets without gaining any bonuses. So yes not helping the team and dropping assets is the basic requirements of being terrible.
The problem here is we vastly disagree on the value of Hezonja. I won't get mad if we draft him but I would be just as happy with Booker or Johnson because I think both are better players. Booker is already a better shooter and smarter player and Johnson is a good shooter with a far better all around game.
Braggins wrote:jdm3 wrote:Johnson and Booker both upgrade our shooting and Johnson upgrades our defense as well. Booker is a better shooter right now than Mario IMO. If we take either of them they help us as much if not more than Mario.
They are terrible because you are giving away assets for nothing at all. To me a future first and Hairston have way more value than Nik and Zeller has way more value than Thompson. Not because Zeller is a future all star but just because he already is better at what we need him to do and is still improving. Moving from 9 to 6 is worthless because Mario is no better than the other guys. So for me you trades are just sending out assets without gaining any bonuses. So yes not helping the team and dropping assets is the basic requirements of being terrible.
The problem here is we vastly disagree on the value of Hezonja. I won't get mad if we draft him but I would be just as happy with Booker or Johnson because I think both are better players. Booker is already a better shooter and smarter player and Johnson is a good shooter with a far better all around game.
What gives you the impression that Booker is a better shooter than Hezonja or that he is a smarter player? Hezonja shot 38% from the FIBA line and has been playing pro basketball for a couple years. Booker has one season of college basketball where he had the simplest role possible and only shot 3% better shooting from the college line. Hezonja is bigger, more athletic, can create his own shot better, and is more experienced. I really don't see any area where Booker has a clear advantage. He might be as good or slightly better at shooting and quicker on his feet defensively, but that is literally it. I think putting Booker in the same tier as Johnson and Hezonja is a pretty big stretch. I honestly doubt Booker would even crack our rotation next season.
Johnson isn't in the same league as Hezonja or Booker as a shooter and the only areas where he has a clear advantage over Hezonja are in areas that where we don't need any help at all. What is slightly upgrading our defense and rebounding going to do for us if we can't space the floor or score any better? We are already historically good at rebounding and have been top 10 in defense two years straight years with Al at center... I don't think it is a certainty that Johnson would immediately improve our spacing and he might even hurt it. He probably isn't going to be any better than Hendo from the NBA line initially, probably worse honestly. He is still good value at 9 but I don't think you can seriously argue that Hezonja isn't a much better fit.
yosemiteben wrote:I don't think high school highlights are at all worth considering when projecting NBA-level impact, but I'm totally on board with jdm3's approach to Johnson, well said.
jdm3 wrote:yosemiteben wrote:I don't think high school highlights are at all worth considering when projecting NBA-level impact, but I'm totally on board with jdm3's approach to Johnson, well said.
I would normally not go there but he was limited more by his role and team than his skills last season IMO. They had a ton of bigs clogging the lane and not enough true shooting threats. Aaron Harrison made 1 more three despite taking 46 more attempts and other than that nobody was within 40 attempts of him. He was assigned a role and one they needed badly and performed it well. I think had he gone to another school he would have been able to show more of his game. This is based off what I expected out of him when he was deciding where to commit. I liked how he had an all around game on offense and rarely made a poor decision.
Vanderbilt_Grad wrote:jdm3 wrote:yosemiteben wrote:I don't think high school highlights are at all worth considering when projecting NBA-level impact, but I'm totally on board with jdm3's approach to Johnson, well said.
I would normally not go there but he was limited more by his role and team than his skills last season IMO. They had a ton of bigs clogging the lane and not enough true shooting threats. Aaron Harrison made 1 more three despite taking 46 more attempts and other than that nobody was within 40 attempts of him. He was assigned a role and one they needed badly and performed it well. I think had he gone to another school he would have been able to show more of his game. This is based off what I expected out of him when he was deciding where to commit. I liked how he had an all around game on offense and rarely made a poor decision.
Bolded ... was that not the same as Hornets last year though? I get that you have to start somewhere, but what would make Booker any different here than he was at in school?
jdm3 wrote:I would normally not go there but he was limited more by his role and team than his skills last season IMO ... He was assigned a role and one they needed badly and performed it well. I think had he gone to another school he would have been able to show more of his game.
yosemiteben wrote:jdm3 wrote:I would normally not go there but he was limited more by his role and team than his skills last season IMO ... He was assigned a role and one they needed badly and performed it well. I think had he gone to another school he would have been able to show more of his game.
That's fair and I don't disagree, but at the end of the day we didn't get to see him in a different context against real talent so we don't know. It's unfortunate, but to me that adds to the risk of the pick. You can give him the benefit of the doubt based on HS tapes and the forced nature of his role at UK, but you can just as easily say that he was able to hide his weaknesses due to that limited role and that he might have made more issues noticeable if he was asked to do more.
Really we don't know. I'm with you that Booker might be really good, but I'm less willing to use the evidence that you are to get there.
I won't be upset if he's the pick, but I am nervous that we won't know what we're getting with him and I do think he'll be at least a couple years away from being a reliable part of our rotation. That's my general view of OAD players though, not unique to him.
Blockwatcher wrote:Lance for Jose Calderon straight up! You guys do it?
JDR720 wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/basketballtalk/status/603272536827113472[/tweet]
I wonder if we reopen trade talks with them.
JDR720 wrote:JDR720 wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/basketballtalk/status/603272536827113472[/tweet]
I wonder if we reopen trade talks with them.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/RealGM/status/603273673831768064[/tweet]
Lance and Marvin for Joe and Mason. maybe we can swap their late first for our early 2nd too.
do we have enough cap space to do that deal?
LofJ wrote:JDR720 wrote:JDR720 wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/basketballtalk/status/603272536827113472[/tweet]
I wonder if we reopen trade talks with them.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/RealGM/status/603273673831768064[/tweet]
Lance and Marvin for Joe and Mason. maybe we can swap their late first for our early 2nd too.
do we have enough cap space to do that deal?
We'd have to send out Roberts, Marvin, and Lance just to get the salaries to work to bring in JJ.
