sunskerr wrote:How do you know Jackson/Tatum/Isaac and Bender/Chriss grade out to Porzingis' level? You simply can't make that prediction. At best it's an honest guess. But let's assume Bender/Chriss become role players, which is a conservative estimate (but a fair one). And what if our #4 busts? Is that not just as likely, if not moreso than #4 becoming a player at KP's level?
Even still, if you're projecting those guys to improve next year, then you also have to project KP to improve as well. Since it's only fair and he's still just going into his 3rd year. You can't say our guys will surely improve beyond a shadow of a doubt but then ignore that KP will improve as well.
1 - Because Marquese Chriss's per 36 numbers actually weren't that far off of Porzingis's last season:
Chriss - 15.6 points 7.2 rebounds 1.2 assists 1.4 steals 1.4 blocks 2.2 TO 44.9% FG 32.1% 3pt 62.4% FT
Porzingis - 19.9 points 7.9 rebounds 1.6 assists 0.8 steals 2.2 blocks 2.0 TO 45% FG 35.7% 3pt 78.6% FT
So Bender and or Jackson/Tatum/Isaac only need to make up the 4.3 points, .7 rebounds, .4 assists, .8 blocks. And anyone want to guess whether or not Bender's per 36 numbers exceed that difference?
Of course it isn't a perfect analogy, and of course Porzingis will improve, but I think Bender or Chriss and Jackson/Tatum/Isaac will be cumulatively better, if not immediately next season, most definitely in 2 years time.
How can we be rushing if Porzingis is only 21 years old? Think about that. He's also 21 dropping 18/7/2 on trash team where Melo and Rose don't pass the ball. This is absolutely the James Harden scenario. We've got the assets which could make it happen. A star at 21 years old headed by a not-so-great GM. This is the opportunity.
It's rushing by throwing away two 20 year olds (not to mention Bledsoe, who would likely be traded) for one 21 year old. None of these young guys are finished products yet, there is still plenty of time to wait and see. It would be terrible if we ended up giving away the best player in the deal along with whatever other assets we thought were necessary to "balance" the trade. Bender/Chriss and Jackson/Tatum/Isaac could each end up better than Porzingis. And it could even be more than one of them.
Don't worry about losing a total number of assets. In the NBA it's always quality over quantity. More-so, if a trade scenario went down we would still have a guy like TJ Warren and he was a 20ppg, non-ball-dominant scorer and presumably still one of Bender/Chriss whom you love so much and are 100% sure turns into a worthwhile player.
Don't get greedy with hoarding assets. They're like milk. You have to use it before it expires- or in this scenario use them before they bust and everyone knows they suck so you can't trade them.
Milk is a terrible analogy. These guys are like saplings. You're arguing trading two saplings for one when you don't know how much fruit any of them will really bear just because you can start to see the one sapling sprout some flowers. At the end of the day, you want as much fruit as possible. Even if each of the two saplings you have produce 2/3 the fruit the other one does, you still have 50% more fruit. So what's riskier, betting on two separate saplings to bear fruit, or betting on one?
