Official Trade Thread - Part XXIX

[verbal8]

That's too much IMO, Ruzious. Take Porter out and replace with Webster, and then it's fair IMO.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I think at this point it takes a little more than Beal/Gortat to acquire Cousins. Sacramento would be get a significant upgrade in the Porter/McLemore swap so that would even out without needing to add a pick. However I think Webster would be going to far in that direction where not even the pick would be valuable enough to balance out the trade.

[Ruzious]

That's too much IMO, Ruzious. Take Porter out and replace with Webster, and then it's fair IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

If you truly believe that Cousins has greatness in him, I'm not sure how you think it's not fair. Remember what we traded for Gortat - and now he's into his 30's. Don't you think Cousins has a ton more value? Beal's almost certainly going to be over-paid (Sac would likely have to pay him more than Cousins is getting!) - and may not be significantly better than McLemore - who is a key player to get since you have to replace Beal.

Back in the day, would you rather have Bob Lanier or Phil Chenier entering their primes? Correct - Lanier by a mile.

[Illmatic12]

That trade is still an overpay imo.

Now, sometimes overpays are worth it.. there, it would be in hopes that reuniting Cousins with Wall would have a synergistic effect and Boogie would be kept in line. But if you take the Wall-Cousins history factor out of it (ie let's say they didn't know each other), there is no way in hell I would trade that for Cousins, given the risk involved w/ him.

DMC has a history of immaturity and clashing with coaches. I'd fear that he would come in here feeling like it's "his" team. As we all know, it is John's team and Demarcus should make no bones about that. Personally I just have a problem with trading the 'house' talentwise, and all of our young, high character players.. for someone who could potentially be a huge negative vortex of character issues.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

That's too much IMO, Ruzious. Take Porter out and replace with Webster, and then it's fair IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

If you truly believe that Cousins has greatness in him, I'm not sure how you think it's not fair. Remember what we traded for Gortat - and now he's into his 30's. Don't you think Cousins has a ton more value? Beal's almost certainly going to be over-paid (Sac would likely have to pay him more than Cousins is getting!) - and may not be significantly better than McLemore - who is a key player to get since you have to replace Beal.

Back in the day, would you rather have Bob Lanier or Phil Chenier entering their primes? Correct - Lanier by a mile.

You're giving away Beal, Porter, and a first. Porter could turn out to be better than Beal. Who knows what the pick could become? AND you're giving away a very solid starting C, Gortat, who is worth his contract. Cousins isn't a rim protecting C. I think it's too much to give. He's a star, not a superstar IMO.

I prefer this deal (with two future firsts added to it). http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ppq85tr

Nene (because he's a PF, which the Kings need, and he played for Karl before); Humphries (because he didn't play last playoffs and I trust Gooden and Porter more as stretch PFs), and Beal PLUS two first round picks, one way off in the future and conditional. Nene would just be a rental for one year. The key selling point would be adding Beal to start ahead of Bellinelli at SG. The Kings would legitimately have a playoff contending team this season; one in which Karl needs to do well.

Keep the better player, Gortat. Give them two firsts but hold on to Porter and Gortat. I trust that a WHOLE LOT MORE than trying to give away Beal and Porter and Gortat.

[TheSecretWeapon]

I've gotta find time to post my "real trade value" toy. I haven't tried to shoehorn in "everything," but if I recall right, Beal + Porter + Gortat would be a major overpay to get Cousins. I don't think the NBA trade market is very rational much of the time, though. My guess is that the price for Cousins will be so high that it won't be worth doing. Unless you think he's going to transmogrify into an MVP candidate once he arrives in DC.

[Dat2U]

I'd go as far as Beal, Gortat & and (2) 1st rd picks for Cousins without hesitation. Porter is probably a bit more than I'd be willing to pay but I'd include Oubre to get a deal done.

[Ruzious]

That's too much IMO, Ruzious. Take Porter out and replace with Webster, and then it's fair IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

If you truly believe that Cousins has greatness in him, I'm not sure how you think it's not fair. Remember what we traded for Gortat - and now he's into his 30's. Don't you think Cousins has a ton more value? Beal's almost certainly going to be over-paid (Sac would likely have to pay him more than Cousins is getting!) - and may not be significantly better than McLemore - who is a key player to get since you have to replace Beal.

Back in the day, would you rather have Bob Lanier or Phil Chenier entering their primes? Correct - Lanier by a mile.

You're giving away Beal, Porter, and a first. Porter could turn out to be better than Beal. Who knows what the pick could become? AND you're giving away a very solid starting C, Gortat, who is worth his contract. Cousins isn't a rim protecting C. I think it's too much to give. He's a star, not a superstar IMO.

I prefer this deal (with two future firsts added to it). http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ppq85tr

Nene (because he's a PF, which the Kings need, and he played for Karl before); Humphries (because he didn't play last playoffs and I trust Gooden and Porter more as stretch PFs), and Beal PLUS two first round picks, one way off in the future and conditional. Nene would just be a rental for one year. The key selling point would be adding Beal to start ahead of Bellinelli at SG. The Kings would legitimately have a playoff contending team this season; one in which Karl needs to do well.

Keep the better player, Gortat. Give them two firsts but hold on to Porter and Gortat. I trust that a WHOLE LOT MORE than trying to give away Beal and Porter and Gortat.

LOL about your wording it - "giving away". You've ignored all the salary reasons, but keeping Gortat in a Cousins trade means virtually no chance at Durant.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but there is almost ZERO chance that Sacto team would get in the playoffs in the West this season.

Beal and a couple of non-consecutive late 1sts aren't going to get him. Nene's ONLY trade value is in his expiring contract, and Sacto doesn't gain any net cap space in your trade. I've been a big fan of his, but after watching Nene in the playoffs, one would have to assume that he's got almost nothing left. Hump has next to no trade value. The Wiz got him for nothing, and he'll turn 31 this season. What your trade comes down to is Beal, 2 late future 1sts (1 no earlier than 2018), and cheap costume jewelry for Cousins and McLemore. I'm not understanding how you've pumped up Cousins so often for years, and then you're not willing to trade anything close to what it would cost to get him.

[Ruzious]

I'd go as far as Beal, Gortat & and (2) 1st rd picks for Cousins without hesitation. Porter is probably a bit more than I'd be willing to pay but I'd include Oubre to get a deal done.

That's reasonable, but trading Beal and Oubre and not getting McLemore or someone like him back leaves a big hole at the 2. While it is the easiest position to fill, it's a problem.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

If you truly believe that Cousins has greatness in him, I'm not sure how you think it's not fair. Remember what we traded for Gortat - and now he's into his 30's. Don't you think Cousins has a ton more value? Beal's almost certainly going to be over-paid (Sac would likely have to pay him more than Cousins is getting!) - and may not be significantly better than McLemore - who is a key player to get since you have to replace Beal.

Back in the day, would you rather have Bob Lanier or Phil Chenier entering their primes? Correct - Lanier by a mile.

You're giving away Beal, Porter, and a first. Porter could turn out to be better than Beal. Who knows what the pick could become? AND you're giving away a very solid starting C, Gortat, who is worth his contract. Cousins isn't a rim protecting C. I think it's too much to give. He's a star, not a superstar IMO.

I prefer this deal (with two future firsts added to it). http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ppq85tr

Nene (because he's a PF, which the Kings need, and he played for Karl before); Humphries (because he didn't play last playoffs and I trust Gooden and Porter more as stretch PFs), and Beal PLUS two first round picks, one way off in the future and conditional. Nene would just be a rental for one year. The key selling point would be adding Beal to start ahead of Bellinelli at SG. The Kings would legitimately have a playoff contending team this season; one in which Karl needs to do well.

Keep the better player, Gortat. Give them two firsts but hold on to Porter and Gortat. I trust that a WHOLE LOT MORE than trying to give away Beal and Porter and Gortat.

LOL about your wording it - "giving away". You've ignored all the salary reasons, but keeping Gortat in a Cousins trade means virtually no chance at Durant.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but there is almost ZERO chance that Sacto team would get in the playoffs in the West this season.

Beal and a couple of non-consecutive late 1sts aren't going to get him. Nene's ONLY trade value is in his expiring contract, and Sacto doesn't gain any net cap space in your trade. I've been a big fan of his, but after watching Nene in the playoffs, one would have to assume that he's got almost nothing left. Hump has next to no trade value. The Wiz got him for nothing, and he'll turn 31 this season. What your trade comes down to is Beal, 2 late future 1sts (1 no earlier than 2018), and cheap costume jewelry for Cousins and McLemore. I'm not understanding how you've pumped up Cousins so often for years, and then you're not willing to trade anything close to what it would cost to get him.

Ruzious, Koufos started every game at C on a 57-win Denver team coached by George Karl. Koufos is on the Kings roster. Karl wants to move Cousins. They spent a lottery pick on Willie Caulie-Stein, and he's ready to contribute immediately. The Kings have serviceable Cs without Cousins. I believe a reasonable offer doesn't have to mortgage all young players to get Cousins.

I beg to differ with you on Nene. Put him on a team with Rondo, Beal, Gay, and Koufos; with Darren Collison, Bellinelli, Humphries, and WCS and I believe they could make a playoff run. Rondo just needs a shooter at SG who can play both ends of the court. Beal is that player.

We differ on this. You and others agree. Still others think it's an overpay.



Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[gambitx777]

As far as DC goes, I would do Beal, Gortat/nene(either one is fine by me) 2 first round picks for DC. Now I don't want to give up Obure or Thomas with out getting McLemore in return, But I fell that Otto should not be in the deal at all. Otto is a solid piece and I feel like we need him!

[nate33]

I wonder what it would take to get Cody Zeller?

I kinda feel that he might be poised for a breakout. He's the type of player who does the little things well, but doesn't post impressive numbers. In a way, he's a little like the Nene of 2 years ago in that he plays good position defense and boxes out well, even if he doesn't accumulate the blocks and rebounds himself. If he can get continue to boost his accuracy and range on his jump shot, he could evolve into a pretty reliable starting PF.

Charlotte has a huge glut of bigs with Jefferson, Kaminsky, Hansbrough, Williams and Hawes. Is there any chance we could get him for a future pick and filler? Or would it have to involve one of Porter or Oubre? If we end up landing Durant, it still might make sense to trade one of Porter or Oubre for him.

His contract is nice because it'll still be cheap in Summer 2016.

[gambitx777]

I disagree, Otto can and probably will play 4 and the 3 so can KD, thy can play together. Plus kelly can play 2 and 3. So all 3 of them could play at the same time if needed. I don't think we need to move them.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I wonder what it would take to get Cody Zeller?

I kinda feel that he might be poised for a breakout. He's the type of player who does the little things well, but doesn't post impressive numbers. In a way, he's a little like the Nene of 2 years ago in that he plays good position defense and boxes out well, even if he doesn't accumulate the blocks and rebounds himself. If he can get continue to boost his accuracy and range on his jump shot, he could evolve into a pretty reliable starting PF.

Charlotte has a huge glut of bigs with Jefferson, Kaminsky, Hansbrough, Williams and Hawes. Is there any chance we could get him for a future pick and filler? Or would it have to involve one of Porter or Oubre? If we end up landing Durant, it still might make sense to trade one of Porter or Oubre for him.

His contract is nice because it'll still be cheap in Summer 2016.

Cody is much more athletic than Tyler Zeller. Tyler Zeller has been something of a late bloomer.

It is IMO likely that Cody Zeller has a breakout.


"Do not despise these small beginnings, for the Lord rejoices to see the work begin,"
"Be the change you want to be."

[TheSecretWeapon]

I had Cody rated about average last season (PPA: 108). BIG improvement from his rookie year (in the 60-70 range, if I recall right). He'll be 23 this season. For the right price, could be a nice pickup.

[payitforward]

I have trouble seeing Cody Zeller as a candidate for any kind of "breakout." To me, at the 4 and 5, unless you're specifically a "stretch four" (which he isn't), you have to be able to rebound better than he does.

His college numbers were powered by shooting a very high % around the basket and getting to the line a lot. As a pro, he's shot a pretty *low* % from the floor so far -- which I attribute to not being the biggest guy any more. He still gets to the line reasonably well, tho not at an extraordinary rate.

Where would the breakout come from? That is my question. He doesn't shoot the 3 at all, and he's not much of a jump-shooter (am I wrong about that?). It's just speculation to imagine that he'd all of a sudden improve as a shooter -- of course, it *could* happen, as anything could, but I wouldn't acquire him based on the idea.

He's on a rookie contract, so maybe he's worth what he's being paid? But I worry that as a high draft pick, he'll get more rope than most guys and be re-signed for more than he's worth. This does happen.

I can't put him on any kind of a target list for the Wizards.

[nate33]

I have trouble seeing Cody Zeller as a candidate for any kind of "breakout." To me, at the 4 and 5, unless you're specifically a "stretch four" (which he isn't), you have to be able to rebound better than he does.

His college numbers were powered by shooting a very high % around the basket and getting to the line a lot. As a pro, he's shot a pretty *low* % from the floor so far -- which I attribute to not being the biggest guy any more. He still gets to the line reasonably well, tho not at an extraordinary rate.

Where would the breakout come from? That is my question. He doesn't shoot the 3 at all, and he's not much of a jump-shooter (am I wrong about that?). It's just speculation to imagine that he'd all of a sudden improve as a shooter -- of course, it *could* happen, as anything could, but I wouldn't acquire him based on the idea.

He's on a rookie contract, so maybe he's worth what he's being paid? But I worry that as a high draft pick, he'll get more rope than most guys and be re-signed for more than he's worth. This does happen.

I can't put him on any kind of a target list for the Wizards.

I hear you on the rebounding, but it's worth noting that his team rebounds better when he is on the floor (and the team is a top 10 rebounding team to begin with). He shot 37% from outside the 16-foot line and he's a 77% FT shooter. Both numbers are really good for a young big who never played on the perimeter in college.

He's a great athlete. His high assists, low turnovers, low fouls, high steals and high FTA/FGA ratio suggest that he is a heady player who understands the game. He has a very good Defensive plus/minus and a substantially positive VORP (which is fairly uncommon for young bigs).

[basketbob]

Hey y'all, quick reaction to a trade idea? I don't know contract and cap details, but you do.
How about

Webster, blair, satoransky
for
Hickson, raduljica (tall euro pg) and either, both or neither of foye (exp) and nick Johnson

I'm working on presumption getting out of next year's salary on Web and blair is valuable. Correct me if I'm wrong

[nate33]

Hey y'all, quick reaction to a trade idea? I don't know contract and cap details, but you do.
How about

Webster, blair, satoransky
for
Hickson, raduljica (tall euro pg) and either, both or neither of foye (exp) and nick Johnson

I'm working on presumption getting out of next year's salary on Web and blair is valuable. Correct me if I'm wrong

You are wrong. Blair has a team option next year so he is effectively an expiring contact. Webster's final year is guaranteed for just $2.5M, and that can be stretched so that it is merely an $833K cap hit next year. The Wizards aren't giving away Satoransky.

[basketbob]

Got it. A straight Hickson for webster swap?

[nate33]

Got it. A straight Hickson for webster swap?

Yes. I'd do that. I don't see the motivation for Denver though. Webster had back surgery at the start of last season and never regained any semblance of his old form. Most of us are assuming that he is effectively done as a useful NBA player.

I guess the possibility exists that he has continues to heal and rehab to the point where he can be decent again, but if that's the case, then the people in the know (the Wizards) wouldn't want to trade him. Basically, if you're Denver, and Washington is willing to trade you Webster, the prudent move would be to decline.