Season Speculation, Trade Ideas & Discussion Pt. 5

[Wilber85]

Trade for Kawhi

[bwgood77]

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?

If the cost is just a 2nd rounder we have nothing to lose...but

The coach doesn't seem to like Skal much for whatever reason because I have him on fantasy and there are games he wouldn't even play, or have 6 minutes or something. The same thing seemed to happen at Kentucky.

I don't know what the deal is, but if they are willing to give him up, I'm pretty hesitant, but mostly because we already have Bender and Chriss who need the minutes.

Bender shoots the 3 better, Chriss blocks more shots, and Bender blocks a similar number. Skal shoots more, but has a worse eFG% than both. And he rebounds a little more than Chriss, and quite a bit more than Bender.

But we basically have everything he provides...better 3 pt shooting and blocking. He's also definitely not a center. But I get the sense coaches don't like him and if they are willing to just get rid of him, that seems a little odd.

But once again, if you think he can add anything, there isn't a real reason to give up a 2nd if you have the roster spot.

[lilfishi22]

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.

Uhh why would we give them up for Skal? He's being shopped as a guy to open up a roster spot lol.

My reasoning is that he can play center, something neither of them have been able to do so far. Monroe is about to be cut/traded and Tyson will probably get the bench treatment down the stretch of the season as per usual, so there's some minutes available for him right there. We're going into this offseason with Tyson has the only center signed to the roster, it's not bad to get a backup plan on the cheap and we have too many late draft picks anyways. I'm suggesting to offer one of our 3 second rounders and see if they bite, not chasing after him seriously.

I'm just not keen on having so many bigs that are in need of development, minutes and just not ready to contribute on a nightly basis. It's frustrating enough to have two guys who are very inconsistent. We still have Big Sauce coming back before the end of this season and I'm just not that keen on him as a player.

I will say this though, from a value to talent standpoint, if the cost is one or two of these million 2nd rounders then it's a good deal.

[Frank Lee]

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?

No ****
Why do anything?
We have 12 inked up for next year, including a couple would be contributors
Just draft and play
Save the cap space for mid season adjustments.
Either trust the timeline or whine about it
I see no reason to accommodate others without significant gain

[NavLDO]

Spoiler:

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

I've never liked soft caps or no caps and also never liked guaranteed contracts. The NFL has a hard cap and much more parity and fans of every team are more vested every year because they feel they have a chance. You often have teams going from worst to first and/or have many new playoff teams each year.

MLB has no cap and I'm not even sure they have contractual limits so it's the worst because the rich owners can outspend everyone else and usually almost always be good and the smaller markets have a MUCH tougher time ever building a contender.

Which why that Diamondback WS in 2001 was SOOO sweet....a true Cinarella-esque, David-and-Goliath-ish scenario.

[LukasBMW]

I've been against making a run at Cousins due to his attitude, but I think he is exactly what we need as a player. EXACTLY.

If we max him, and keep our top pick, we could be in really good shape.

We could use the Bucks pick and/or Miami pick to trade for our PG. We wouldn't need much...just a 3&D guy like Beverly to make sure Booker/TJ/Boogie get looks.


Beverly/Ulis
Booker/Daniels
TJ/JJ
Chriss/Bender
Boogie/Tyson

+ Our top pick.

I'd much rather this than gutting our roster for a trade.

[NavLDO]

Dame is a guy worth advancing our #timeline.
Kemba's not.

Yep. He's 72 days younger, and has avg'd .5 Asst, and 2.6 Pts per 36 more than Kemba, and identical TRB. Yet he's averaged fewer Blks & Stls, while more TOVs and PFs. His ORtg is higher, yet so is his DRtg.

But yes, Dame has higher PER, WS, and VORP, but point is, he's hardly a slam dunk over Kemba.

You make it sound like it's the difference between Booker and Knight...

If you're ok paying Dame, but not Kemba, I really question what the major difference is...because there really isn't one.

[dremill24]

I don’t really think he is..but if Kawhi is available holy **** you need to get him.

[darealjuice]

Or, we could trade for Kemba, and lure a 3rd player to come...OR...still draft a high-quality player, and trade Dudley/Chandler, and still have Cap space to sign whoever we want before signing Booker next Summer, or any number of scenarios...

Trading for Kemba isn't a bad idea, and it isn't ruin of our team if we do. You've made it sound like someone is taking away your Birthday if we trade for him. Missing out on the Top 5 Draft pick isn't the end of the world...again, it's not black and white; it's not a Top 5 Draft pick or junk. It's pretty well understood, this late in the process, even with Kemba, we'll still have a Lottery Pick, which will still hold value in this draft.

So ignoring the fact that Jordan has said he's not trading Kemba without getting an All Star in return and you still choose to bring up this buried post...

You want to expand on how we're luring a 3rd player, drafting a high quality player, and trading for another player in this situation? Because I'd be happy to tell you why that's not likely: Kemba isn't an injury-riddled malcontent like Bledsoe, we're not getting him for an expiring contract and a pick in the late 20s. It's at least going to cost our pick (that would at least be valued in the 10-15 range because, according to many of you, we're a playoff team adding Kemba Walker right away), likely one of our young prospects, and matching salaries to bring him in; and there will definitely be other bidders to help up the price.

So what is the likelihood of drafting that high quality player you speak of when we drafting with a pick in the 20s, maybe Milwuakee's pick if they implode, and a bunch of second rounders? Where are we getting that 3rd star player for the amazingly convenient cost of Chandler/Dudley, the Miami pick(s?), and the Milwuakee pick? How are we signing Cousins to pair with Booker and Kemba when we only have 10M in cap space available, by attaching assets to move contracts (i.e. mortgaging the future)?

I don't know why you would say I'm acting like someone is taking away my birthday by trading for him though. If it happens so be it, I'll still cheer for him, but I don't think it's our best move given where we are as a team. Sorry you don't agree with my reasoning, but I rarely agree with the multiple rambling essays you post each day and I don't go out of my way to make snide comments toward you.

You make it sound as if by trading for Kemba, we are trading for a middling talent; the only reason he's not an All-Star this year is the team he is on. Small Market and Bad Record = No All-Star

21.8 / 5.9 / 3.4

Those are All-Star numbers. You are trying to assert that the 6th Pick (where we are now--not top 5), plus future/later 1st Rd picks is definitely >>> Kemba plus a Late-Lotto.

I've said over and over that Kemba is a very good player. I just don't think he's an All Star in the West, and the reality is that those aren't All Star numbers in the West. Sorry, you can argue all you want, but it's just a fact. Just last year Damian Lillard, on a successful team, averaged 27/6/5 on better efficiency than Kemba has ever had and still wasn't an All Star. 21/6/3.5 doesn't cut the cheese here like it does out East.

P.S. We're actually at #5 right now--not the 6th Pick.

Basically, what you are asserting is that you know, for certain, that:

Young / Booker / Warren / Chriss / Mitchell Robinson(??)

...is better than...

Kemba / Booker / Warren / Jackson Jr. / Nurkic(??) ...

...because it's possible Kemba does attract a Center like Boogie, or maybe a S&T trade option like Capela, Jokic, Nurkic, or something ...

And I know, yes, it LOOKS like Young and Doncic are can't miss, but we've all seen that horror story play out before. All I'm saying is, don't be so quick to dismiss the option of Kemba signing with us as being the worst option for us, because that's not true, and there's not way to prove it, even after the fact, you just do not know.

No, YOU'RE asserting that I'm asserting that I know that for certain. My post says we can use a top 5 pick this offseason as better trade bait than what our pick would be valued for a mid-season upgrade, and you're telling me that I'm saying go even younger lol..? I'm open to drafting with our pick if it's the best option, but if we let Monroe expire and were able to have a package including our high pick, Dudley, and Chandler, then we can actually have space to sign another max contract FA this Summer.

Also Kemba, the guy who's going to make us so much better next year, is going to keep us low enough to draft Jaren Jackson Jr? It's convenient for you to get a guy you like at a pick that we very likely wouldn't even have while also magically acquiring Nurkic with the many remaining assets we have after acquiring Kemba in your scenario though.

[bwgood77]

I don’t really think he is..but if Kawhi is available holy **** you need to get him.

I think it would take an offer something like Tatum, Brown, maybe one of their PGs and their Lakers/Kings pick. We just don't have the assets assuming Booker is off the table.

[Frank Lee]

We really don’t have the assets for any trade for a would be / confirmed all star. We either buy the outright(FA) or draft one

[dremill24]

I don’t really think he is..but if Kawhi is available holy **** you need to get him.

I think it would take an offer something like Tatum, Brown, maybe one of their PGs and their Lakers/Kings pick. We just don't have the assets assuming Booker is off the table.

Let me have my moment ok

[lilfishi22]

I don’t really think he is..but if Kawhi is available holy **** you need to get him.

I think it would take an offer something like Tatum, Brown, maybe one of their PGs and their Lakers/Kings pick. We just don't have the assets assuming Booker is off the table.

Let me have my moment ok

Would you move Booker + whatever + or 1st for him?

[dremill24]

I think it would take an offer something like Tatum, Brown, maybe one of their PGs and their Lakers/Kings pick. We just don't have the assets assuming Booker is off the table.

Let me have my moment ok

Would you move Booker + whatever + or 1st for him?

In a vacuum, Kawhi is worth dealing a guy like Booker for. But in the Suns’ position I don’t really think it makes a ton of sense.

[RunDogGun]

I think it would take an offer something like Tatum, Brown, maybe one of their PGs and their Lakers/Kings pick. We just don't have the assets assuming Booker is off the table.

Let me have my moment ok

Would you move Booker + whatever + or 1st for him?

I think it would be insane to trade a player who scored 70pts in a NBA game. You build around that player. Moreover, I really hate trade ideas where we trade for a guy we could have drafted, while giving up a ton of assets.

[King4Day]

Let me have my moment ok

Would you move Booker + whatever + or 1st for him?

In a vacuum, Kawhi is worth dealing a guy like Booker for. But in the Suns’ position I don’t really think it makes a ton of sense.

Agreed. We'd want Leonard to pair with Booker. Not replace him. I'd rather keep Booker and watch him grow with the team we have instead of possibly watch Leonard walk in 2 years.

[lilfishi22]

Let me have my moment ok

Would you move Booker + whatever + or 1st for him?

In a vacuum, Kawhi is worth dealing a guy like Booker for. But in the Suns’ position I don’t really think it makes a ton of sense.

I still think it makes sense. He's still only 26, probably the best two way player and is a virtual lock for an all-NBA team every year. The only thing that would have me take a step back is his injury history and I wonder how much of his efficiency and ability to play defense the entire game is because of Pop's system.

[jredsaz]

I don’t really think he is..but if Kawhi is available holy **** you need to get him.

I think it would take an offer something like Tatum, Brown, maybe one of their PGs and their Lakers/Kings pick. We just don't have the assets assuming Booker is off the table.

That's so much. Damn. And they would still have the Memphis pick and the Clippers pick laying around. I wonder if Ainge would offer that?

The only way we get close is if the Spurs loved Jackson in a Vivek loves Buddy Hield kind if way.

[bwgood77]

Let me have my moment ok

Would you move Booker + whatever + or 1st for him?

In a vacuum, Kawhi is worth dealing a guy like Booker for. But in the Suns’ position I don’t really think it makes a ton of sense.

Yeah, I wouldn't do it and no way the Suns do it not only because he is a local star the fans embrace, but there would likely be little chance if you traded Booker plus our first and and whatever else for Kawhi that Kawhi would re-sign with the Booker-less Suns in the summer of 2019. If our roster is bad now, that would be an absolute disaster.

[hollywood6964]

Would you move Booker + whatever + or 1st for him?

In a vacuum, Kawhi is worth dealing a guy like Booker for. But in the Suns’ position I don’t really think it makes a ton of sense.

I still think it makes sense. He's still only 26, probably the best two way player and is a virtual lock for an all-NBA team every year. The only thing that would have me take a step back is his injury history and I wonder how much of his efficiency and ability to play defense the entire game is because of Pop's system.

Exactly. They are all system players to an extent, even duncan.

Now before the assumption brigade starts running in, wagging their finger, that's not to say that any of them couldn't be effective on other teams in other systems, but that system n culture definately elevates all of their efficiency n more importantly in terms of trade value (maybe, save aldridge in past years), stature.