Moderators: bwgood77, lilfishi22, Qwigglez
cosmofizzo wrote:rsavaj wrote:King Ken wrote:What would it take for you to take a deal for Shumpert or J.R. Smith from Cleveland?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
a decent first IMO
No way. Not taking on those albatrosses. This is basically a non-starter.
Maaaybe the BKN pick.
rsavaj wrote:McDonough turned Bledsoe, IT, Dragic and the Lakers pick into Knight, Monroe, and some mid-late first rounders.
I have no faith in him landing guys like Kawhi,Dame or even Kemba, CJ, Love.
King Ken wrote:What would it take for you to take a deal for Shumpert or J.R. Smith from Cleveland?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
DarkHawk wrote:King Ken wrote:What would it take for you to take a deal for Shumpert or J.R. Smith from Cleveland?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
He's probably going to cost a 1st rounder (offloaded by the Cavs) in the late teens - 20's. Or maybe something similar to what it took for the Nets to take Carroll.
Suns have enough cap restricting contracts though that no deal for either of them makes sense (short of that Nets pick which isn't being moved for anything short of a star player)
Why do you ask?
BobbieL wrote:DarkHawk wrote:King Ken wrote:What would it take for you to take a deal for Shumpert or J.R. Smith from Cleveland?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
He's probably going to cost a 1st rounder (offloaded by the Cavs) in the late teens - 20's. Or maybe something similar to what it took for the Nets to take Carroll.
Suns have enough cap restricting contracts though that no deal for either of them makes sense (short of that Nets pick which isn't being moved for anything short of a star player)
Why do you ask?
I think the Suns should be trying to offload contracts like Chandler, Monroe and possibly Daniels. Granted, the Suns don't have to do anything with Monroe - either a buyout or just let it expire. Either way, the Suns cap is in pretty good shape. Right now on Spotrac, if they renounce Monroe, they have 13m of cap space; if they let Len go, that makes 20m; Alan Williams would be 25, but I think at 5.5m - he is a guy you want to keep if healthy.
cosmofizzo wrote:BobbieL wrote:DarkHawk wrote:
He's probably going to cost a 1st rounder (offloaded by the Cavs) in the late teens - 20's. Or maybe something similar to what it took for the Nets to take Carroll.
Suns have enough cap restricting contracts though that no deal for either of them makes sense (short of that Nets pick which isn't being moved for anything short of a star player)
Why do you ask?
I think the Suns should be trying to offload contracts like Chandler, Monroe and possibly Daniels. Granted, the Suns don't have to do anything with Monroe - either a buyout or just let it expire. Either way, the Suns cap is in pretty good shape. Right now on Spotrac, if they renounce Monroe, they have 13m of cap space; if they let Len go, that makes 20m; Alan Williams would be 25, but I think at 5.5m - he is a guy you want to keep if healthy.
I'm currently of the opinion that we should keep Troy Daniels. I'd like to compete next year, and selling Daniels would make that significantly harder, IMO. Everyone needs a gunslinger.
cosmofizzo wrote:BobbieL wrote:DarkHawk wrote:
He's probably going to cost a 1st rounder (offloaded by the Cavs) in the late teens - 20's. Or maybe something similar to what it took for the Nets to take Carroll.
Suns have enough cap restricting contracts though that no deal for either of them makes sense (short of that Nets pick which isn't being moved for anything short of a star player)
Why do you ask?
I think the Suns should be trying to offload contracts like Chandler, Monroe and possibly Daniels. Granted, the Suns don't have to do anything with Monroe - either a buyout or just let it expire. Either way, the Suns cap is in pretty good shape. Right now on Spotrac, if they renounce Monroe, they have 13m of cap space; if they let Len go, that makes 20m; Alan Williams would be 25, but I think at 5.5m - he is a guy you want to keep if healthy.
I'm currently of the opinion that we should keep Troy Daniels. I'd like to compete next year, and selling Daniels would make that significantly harder, IMO. Everyone needs a gunslinger.
rsavaj wrote:McDonough turned Bledsoe, IT, Dragic and the Lakers pick into Knight, Monroe, and some mid-late first rounders.
I have no faith in him landing guys like Kawhi,Dame or even Kemba, CJ, Love.
BobbieL wrote:cosmofizzo wrote:BobbieL wrote:
I think the Suns should be trying to offload contracts like Chandler, Monroe and possibly Daniels. Granted, the Suns don't have to do anything with Monroe - either a buyout or just let it expire. Either way, the Suns cap is in pretty good shape. Right now on Spotrac, if they renounce Monroe, they have 13m of cap space; if they let Len go, that makes 20m; Alan Williams would be 25, but I think at 5.5m - he is a guy you want to keep if healthy.
I'm currently of the opinion that we should keep Troy Daniels. I'd like to compete next year, and selling Daniels would make that significantly harder, IMO. Everyone needs a gunslinger.
thasts true about Daniels - he only makes like 3.5m
So really 20m of cap space should be enough to do something if you renounce Len and Monroe. If you move Chandler this summer or in a few weeks - that would be a bit more space one would imagine
Suns are sitting pretty well - just need to do SOMETHING this summer though - get your top 5 pick and make a damn splash!
Windhorst says he thinks they are making multiple moves. Does that mean Isiah now that George Hill is there/ DOes that mean Love since he was called out? Nobody is taking Tristan Khardashian -
So probably Thomas or Love
Pelton had a Isiah Thomas to Hornets for Kemba deal as one several options for Kemba - but with trading Hill and Shumpert that doesn't help them off load contracts
darealjuice wrote:I'd also be interested in Skal. Was really surprised he dropped so far, plenty of potential there and I'm surprised the Kings would give up on him so easily. If we could take him for a second or 2 that'd be pretty cool.
bhawk wrote:darealjuice wrote:I'd also be interested in Skal. Was really surprised he dropped so far, plenty of potential there and I'm surprised the Kings would give up on him so easily. If we could take him for a second or 2 that'd be pretty cool.
Respectfully, if Skal and Malichi couldn't crack the Kings rotation, why would we waste the roster space? We are already waiting on Chriss, Bender, Jackson to turn into NBA starters. Josh Jackson looks the best of the group so far... Maybe we trade Chriss for Skal?
lilfishi22 wrote:bhawk wrote:darealjuice wrote:I'd also be interested in Skal. Was really surprised he dropped so far, plenty of potential there and I'm surprised the Kings would give up on him so easily. If we could take him for a second or 2 that'd be pretty cool.
Respectfully, if Skal and Malichi couldn't crack the Kings rotation, why would we waste the roster space? We are already waiting on Chriss, Bender, Jackson to turn into NBA starters. Josh Jackson looks the best of the group so far... Maybe we trade Chriss for Skal?
Yeah unless we're giving up Bender or Chriss for him, I don't see why we would add another guy who needs NBA minutes. I don't want to give up either guys for Skal.
darealjuice wrote:bigfoot wrote:gaspar wrote:No one is questioning that Booker could leave (in 6 years!) or that we have to add some win now pieces soon, but to say that "the win now mode needs to happen before the trade deadline" is absurd.
Except as I said before it's five years, not six years, because he will have a player option in his last year. Again imagine two more years of losing while we develop these young draft picks that are supposed to help Booker get into the playoffs. Now imagine those draft picks panning out like say Alex Len, for example.
We have plenty of young assets in Chriss, Bender, Jackson, Ulis, Reed, Peters, two Miami 1st, Bucks 1st, three second round picks this year, and all our future draft picks. It would be stupid not to use them to get a star player. If we can move Monroe, draft picks, and a young player to get a legit star we should. That will make it easier to add legitimate free agents and a coach this summer too. It's not about winning this season, it's about the setup for winning next year. Drafting rookies and the inability to land quality free agents this summer will likely result in another losing season next year.
Everyone agrees that we need to use these assets to get a legit star with Booker, it’s the timing that we disagree with. Some people want to do it this offseason, and some people, including you, want to do it now. Our point is that we can easily get a top 5 pick that would be very valuable to draft with or could be traded for a higher level player than Kemba, all while still having cap space, Miami’s pick, Milwaukee’s pick, and Chandler/Dudley’s soon to be expiring contracts for making other moves. We can do more with that to build a winning team for next year than we can adding Kemba now at the expense of those picks and having our pick in the late lottery.
darealjuice wrote:I'd also be interested in Skal. Was really surprised he dropped so far, plenty of potential there and I'm surprised the Kings would give up on him so easily. If we could take him for a second or 2 that'd be pretty cool.
bigfoot wrote:lilfishi22 wrote:NavLDO wrote:
I mean, I understand the concept. It's not like the money machine stops printing money once you hit the Luxury Tax Limit, lol, but the point, and the way they 'make it sound' is that if you go over the Cap, you are assessed a 'Luxury Tax', but even that has a limit. If you go beyond the 'Luxury Tax' limit, then you incur some sort of other penalty, like naming your first born grandchild "David Stearn" or something,
So, I just read this on the NBA Cap FAQ page...
So, like I said, if you are a billionaire, and packing your stadium every night, wouldn't you rather spend $155M, as opposed to 'sucking' and not filling your seats, spending $80M?
So, yeah, in theory, the Pels can sign him, if they so choose, and only incur this type of penalty...
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q18
I'm sorry, but if they want TRUE parity in this league, they need to go to a Hard Cap, or a situation where the penalty is much more severer, like losing draft picks.
The teams that go over the Luxury Tax limit, your 1st Rd pick goes to the team with the lowest records. So, say, the Pels and Warriors both went over next season, the Pels pick would go the the team 1st in the Lottery, since their pick is the most advantageous, and the Warriors pick would go to the team with the 2nd pick, because their pick is 'higher'. I bet THEN the teams would be more careful...that would also help to promote parity, by "taking from the rich and giving to the poor"
You're telling me. I've been for a hard cap for a long time. I'm not sure about other American sports but in Australia, we get salary cap scandals every couple of years in the Rugby where teams over spend the hard cap via "incentives" or back door deals and it's like a huge thing. It's good for competition because it levels the playing field but it's not good financially. As I explained before, rich teams or teams with rich owners don't want to be limited in how they spend. They see it as, oh I have money so I should put on the most competitive team I can buy and you shouldn't stop me form doing it. Then poor teams/small market teams are out there probably wanting more level competition from an ability to sign FA standpoint but then if they get the hard cap, they won't get the $10-15m in "tax returns" from the LT from the LT paying teams. So small-mid sized teams STFU, take that free money and put on the best product on the floor they can.
As much as we dislike it, there's no real financial incentive to install a hard cap.
Your idea about taking picks from the rich and giving to the poor sounds good in principle but it's also what they already do essentially. Rich teams are generally those who are at or near the top of the league (unless you're just badly managed like BKN a couple yrs ago) and likely have crappy picks anyway so they usually just trade it for a player that can contribute now. At the same time, teams at the bottom of the league would be incentivised to "tank" to be a bad team and get a top lotto pick AND now a pick from one of these LT paying teams. Guaranteed these teams paying top dollar for a championship calibre roster don't give a **** about a late 1st round pick lol
Instead of taking away draft picks for over the cap teams, adjusting the win percentage for playoff seeding would be better. So a team that overspends to win might fall from a first seed to a lower seed. They lose home game advantage and possibly funds from extra home games in a seven game series. Would certainly make it more interesting.
bwgood77 wrote:NavLDO wrote:bwgood77 wrote:Spoiler:
Fair enough, one can always find an article that takes an impressive player, and runs his play through a series of tests, etc., and say he's the best at something. But the fact his, when you take his numbers, compare them to other shooters from both past and present, his numbers, while impressive, just are not one of the best in history, UNLESS, you start adding qualifiers, which we've been down this road before, and of you add a bunch of qualifiers, then sure, but I'm just saying, I would term it differently, as I did, because he's plenty impressive enough to just say, he's one of the most prolific PGs in College Basketball History, which to me, says more than 'one of the best Shooters', anyway.
Because this, right here, says it all...
http://cbbref.com/tiny/HXvpI
PGs with at least 25 PPG, ranked by Assists.
I've read numerous items from scouts who do more contextual studies watching film, etc, saying similar things, but I'm not going to take a long time to have some drawn out debate with you because you may not think he's a particularly good shooter. Here is more...Trae Young early on in his freshman season is doing things that college basketball fans rarely see ... Through Oklahoma’s first ten games, he averaged nearly 30 points and nine assists per game, which is unheard of for any player let alone a freshman ... Young has also yet to score fewer than 22 points since the season opener ... Young is just the fourth high-major freshman guard in seven years to record a usage rate higher than 30 percent ... Two of those players, [Player: D’Angelo Russell] and Markelle Fultz, were top-two draft picks ...
The first thing that jumps out about Young is his seemingly limitless shooting range ... Young is a threat to score from anywhere on the court once he crosses half court and can effortlessly knock down shots beyond the NBA three-point line ...
He may be the best shooter in college basketball since Stephen Curry played at Davidson......
What separates Young from other great shooters is that, like Curry, he has the ability to knock down shots from distance off a variety of dribble moves and not just off the catch or off of simple one-dribble pull ups ...
He has a quick, compact release with minimal wasted motion that allows him to get his shot off even in tight space ... Young’s jumper unlocks numerous other options offensively for him ... Although he is not the most explosive athlete, the threat of his jumper forces defenders to guard him way out on the perimeter, making it easier for him to get by his man and into the paint ... Young has shown the ability to create his own shot from inside the arc with a solid handle ... He has a great floater from the mid range area as well that he can score with consistently when he is not able to get all the way to the rim ... Young’s ability to operate out of the pick and roll is very advanced for a player of his age
http://www.nbadraft.net/players/trae-young