hollywood6964 wrote:NavLDO wrote:Saberestar wrote:The more I think about it, the more I like this trade for the Suns.
I wanted that before the deadline, we needed to bring a PG who could probably be part of our core in the future.
He is good enough to start, but he is perfect as a veteran backup for a rookie PG.
If we are lucky in the draft and we can get Trae or Doncic we can really be set for the future at PG, SG and SF.
PG: Trae or Doncic/ Payton / Ulis
SG: Booker/ Daniels/ Reed
SF: Warren/ Jackson/ Reed
We will need to improve our PF and C position, we need to add at least one big time frontcourt player.
Exactly. And this alleviates my fears -- (whew! Thank goodness for that! Nav's fears are allayed!!
) -- of having a Rookie PG come in and having to attempt to develop with 3 guys that are still trying to learn how to play with a 'regular, NBA-Starter-level-talent-PG', because they have never played with a true Ball distributor. Bledsoe never was; Ulis might be, but he's just NOT a starter-level talent, nor was Canaan (even if he was closer); and Booker is a true SG--not a PG, or even really a Combo Guard. He is NOW, but he wasn't coming in.
Anyway, this gives our guys 25 games or so to play with a true floor general, and I like that. If we can manage to keep him?? Great, even better, but if not, I'm happy to trade a 40th pick for 25 games of more ideal development conditions than what we had.
Short sighted. We should have stayed course. We need that draft pick. We were trending towards the very bottom, %25 ping pong bottom. Now at the finish line, mcdope trips on a banana peel, of course.
To be honest, the absolute best case scenario is this guy somehow blows the **** up, oladipo style, n wants to stay with the team that traded for him. But that's unlikely. He played for a s#!t magic team where he was held back by no one, n had plenty of opportunity to make plays.
More likely he'll play steady, which is light years better than anything we've had, account for a few extra wins (because we were playing straight garbage at pg all season), at least, n take us out of the running.
And this is for a possible rental. And not for a superstar, that we're trying to sway to stay by trading for him last second. Where there's some justified risk.
As far as this development you speak of; there will be no true development, just a few better passes here n there n more for stability for less than a third of a season, making them Look better, not be better.
I just don't see the upside, outside of that unlikely oladipo like scenario. Everyone saying it's low risk/moderate reward. I feel it's moderate risk/low reward, burgeoning on high risk , being the fact that we might go on a bit of a tear, at some point, n win say, 4 of 6. N now we're, let's say, picking 9th instead of 1 or 2.
I would've passed on the trade. N if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But I think everyone here will change their tunes come draft time, n say they were thinking about this all along haha.
Really??
2010–11 NBA Western 10th Pacific 2nd 40 42 .488 17
2011–12 NBA Western 10th Pacific 3rd 33 33 .500 17
2012–13 NBA Western 15th Pacific 5th 25 57 .305 32
(If we can only draft Noel / McLemore...) 2013–14 NBA Western 9th Pacific 3rd 48 34 .585 9
2014–15 NBA Western 10th Pacific 3rd 39 43 .476 28
2015–16 NBA Western 14th Pacific 4th 23 59 .280 50
(If only we could draft Simmons / Ingram...) 2016–17 NBA Western 15th Pacific 5th 24 58 .293 43
(If we draft JJ, we're set....)2017–18 NBA Western 13th Pacific 4th 18 38 .321 24.5
(We just need to tank two more years, then we'll be good...) Don't tell me about being shortsighted. You need a mixture of FAs and draft to succeed.
The Sixers had 2 x 1st Overall and 2 x 3rd Overall picks. They have Saric, they had the #2 Overall pick in Turner from 2010.
The Cavs had the #1 Overall pick 3 out of 4 years, and the 4th overall pick the other year.
The Lakers had the 7th, followed by 3 straight 2nds.
The Magic with the 2nd, then the 4th and 10th (Payton), then 5th, 11th, and most recently, 6th.
The Kings? 4th, 5th, 10th, 5th, 7th, 8th, 6th, 13th (after trading the 8th to us), 5th, and 10th.
T-Wolves? Ah, heck, who knows? They've had so many in the past decade, there's too many to count, and they "wheel'd-n-'deal'd" their way with players like Love, Lavine, and Dunn to get players back like Wiggins and drafted guys like KAT 1st overall.
So...
Which one of those are going to the finals based upon home-growing their draft picks??
We've had the 11th (Kieff), 12th (Marshall), which were supposed to augment our team, and not really be complete re-tools...but then we had Len, who was 5th overall, then our two best players, drafted in subsequent years 14th and 13th, then back to Top 10 picks for Bender and Chriss, then last year JJ. And now, we just 'bought' another recent Top 10 selection for a 'song', and you are saying that is shortsighted because we might win a few more games and not be Top 5? And what happens in the off chance he fits in really well, and makes our team truly better overall, and we sign him long-term and he ends up being our PG of the future? How exactly is that "short sighted"?
Markelle Fultz was a can't miss PG prospect last year and drafted 1st overall. What's he doing now? What happens if, say a guy like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander ends up being a better PG than Trae Young in 4 years, similar to how Elfrid Payton is better than Dante Exum?
And McD is the one being short sighted (or anyone who agrees with this trade)??
