THE J0KER wrote:Very interesting CHI-DEN deal, I must say. But reason why I want to stay with MPJ gamble is two more years under rookie contract, which would be key factor in our cap flexibility to do something big ASAP if he will have breakthrough in 2020. Also, I guess we would lose Grant next summer because of that deal.
But if Chicago wants to give Markkanen chance, next deal would be possible:
Harris, Barton, Plumlee, Beasley, Juancho, Bol for LaVine and Otto Porter
I think that is a huge overpay for Lavine and Porter, I wouldn't trade Harris straight up for Lavine. As good as Lavine has been on offense, Harris has been that and more on defense. Last I checked he was giving up 33.5% shooting percentage. Considering he is guarding the other teams best perimeter player for all his minutes that could be a huge argument for Harris as DPOY and at this pace he should be 1st team all defensive team. Lavine is nowhere near a top 5 scorer.
Can you explain to me why so many want a ball dominate guard? Lavine has a 5% higher usage than Murray meaning that he either turns over the ball or shoots more than Murray, on a per 36 minute basis Lavine is about 1 ppg at a slightly higher rate but Murray is the better passer (with Jokic and Barton taking a lot of possessions from him), better rebounder, better defender, and turns over the ball less. While you cannot really compare time of possession due to Murray bringing the ball up the court, the average time of possession is 4 seconds per touch with him running isos or pick and roll as the ball handler which is more than anybody on the Nuggets team. I just don't see the value in adding someone who is only a slight upgrade in scoring with a down grade everywhere else, with Jokic being the guy who should be getting those touches as he is clearly the best out of all of them.
Can you explain why so many want iso scorers? I really just don't understand what I am missing.
THE J0KER wrote:Very interesting CHI-DEN deal, I must say. But reason why I want to stay with MPJ gamble is two more years under rookie contract, which would be key factor in our cap flexibility to do something big ASAP if he will have breakthrough in 2020. Also, I guess we would lose Grant next summer because of that deal.
But if Chicago wants to give Markkanen chance, next deal would be possible:
Harris, Barton, Plumlee, Beasley, Juancho, Bol for LaVine and Otto Porter
I think that is a huge overpay for Lavine and Porter, I wouldn't trade Harris straight up for Lavine. As good as Lavine has been on offense, Harris has been that and more on defense. Last I checked he was giving up 33.5% shooting percentage. Considering he is guarding the other teams best perimeter player for all his minutes that could be a huge argument for Harris as DPOY and at this pace he should be 1st team all defensive team. Lavine is nowhere near a top 5 scorer.
Can you explain to me why so many want a ball dominate guard?
Spoiler:
Lavine has a 5% higher usage than Murray meaning that he either turns over the ball or shoots more than Murray, on a per 36 minute basis Lavine is about 1 ppg at a slightly higher rate but Murray is the better passer (with Jokic and Barton taking a lot of possessions from him), better rebounder, better defender, and turns over the ball less. While you cannot really compare time of possession due to Murray bringing the ball up the court, the average time of possession is 4 seconds per touch with him running isos or pick and roll as the ball handler which is more than anybody on the Nuggets team. I just don't see the value in adding someone who is only a slight upgrade in scoring with a down grade everywhere else, with Jokic being the guy who should be getting those touches as he is clearly the best out of all of them.
Can you explain why so many want iso scorers? I really just don't understand what I am missing.
It is not about the player profile, but about his overall quality. Denver needs TOP40-TOP50 player to add to Jokic and Murray to be playoff competitive against league TOP5 teams. We can fight them in regular-season thanks to our depth, but for the playoff, we need "The Third Man". LaVine contract is team-friendly because he signs it after ACL injury when no guarantee he will improve anymore, so he has the same contract as Gary Harris, which is a legit contender for all-NBA first defensive team this season, but still far away to be called NBA TOP40-TOP50 player (unlike LaVine). Nobody says it must be the guard (only the center doesn't make sense), just another TOP50 player or better. LaVine is not a perfect fit for Jokic and Murray, but who cares? For example, send him on the floor in first and the last 4 minutes of every quarter, and send Jokic and Murray on the first and last 8 minutes of every half, so he will be the real on-floor general and leader of the team in these 15 minutes where Jokic and Murray are out, and for sure not the useless team player when all starters are in the game. Harden and Westbrook are awful fit, but they cover all 48 minutes of Rockets game. Harden FG% efficiency is dropped, but Houston numbers rise. Also, why complaint about LaVine defense, if we get in the same package Otto Porter, potentially great two-way forward? For me, LaVine with 20M contract with MPJ under rookie contract stays is a better package than Markkanen under 25M-30M new contract and Harris with 20M contract.
Coeur has been saying "consolidate" for a long time. I just didn't like some of his "consolidate ideas".
Now others say "consolidate" but still others don't like their ideas.
Everyone tends to over-value their own players - fans & GMs & ownership all.
l'm willing to overpay, if it gets us the right player. IMO the right player is a two-way wing that will take 15+ shots per game, shooting 45-35-80 or better. They need to be motion oriented and good at finishing at the bucket. They also need to be able to play solid defense against the majority of wings. The dream player? Sure! Hard to get? Absolutely.
Trading Jokic & Murray - not an option. Trading Porter or Bol - not much of an option. We gambled on them and we might as well see what happens.
I'm willing to trade most of the rest, but some I would do so reluctantly. It is time to stop saying "young team" and start looking at building a championship contender.
According to Shams Charania of The Athletic, multiple teams have done their due diligence and had conversations with the Denver Nuggets about Malik Beasley.
Charania also pointed out how the Nuggets “routinely” receive calls about players like Beasley: “Because of their wing depth with Beasley, Juancho Hernangomez and Gary Harris, Denver (14-7) routinely receives trade calls but has no traction currently on any deals.”
jayu70 wrote:Hawks fan here....what are you looking for for Beasley and Hernangomez?
Denver is so deep, they are only carrying 14 players and several that probably deserve to get rotation minutes are not going to see much playing time. Whatever we receive in exchange for Beasley or Hernangomez is probably off little interest in Denver. It seems likely that Denver won't be making a trade unless it's some sort of "mini-blockbuster" that brings in a solid starter that will be a scorer that can provide 20 pts per game with some defense.
But that's just my opinion and I've been wrong before.
Snidely FC wrote:CHA fan would like to swap Maliks, Monk for Beasley...
though if DEN wants someone in return for Beasley who will help win in playoffs this year:
Marvin Williams (expiring, 40% from 3, defense, terrific veteran presence),) + Monk for Plumlee + Beasley?
Plug in Biyombo (expiring, rim protection), MKG (expiring, defensive wing), or Cody Zeller (>Plumlee) instead of Marvin if preferred
any interest?
Bismack Biyombo, Marvin Williams, and Miles Bridges for Will Barton, Mason Plumlee, Juancho Hernangomez, and Malik Beasley
Hornets will get realistic chances to reach the playoff with these guys, and a good starting position to hold expiring ones. Denver will not be in a position to fight for these guys next summer anyway because of cap problems, and Bridges under rookie contract next two seasons will be more valuable for us than Barton because of the same reason.
Snidely FC wrote:CHA fan would like to swap Maliks, Monk for Beasley...
though if DEN wants someone in return for Beasley who will help win in playoffs this year:
Marvin Williams (expiring, 40% from 3, defense, terrific veteran presence),) + Monk for Plumlee + Beasley?
Plug in Biyombo (expiring, rim protection), MKG (expiring, defensive wing), or Cody Zeller (>Plumlee) instead of Marvin if preferred
any interest?
Bismack Biyombo, Marvin Williams, and Miles Bridges for Will Barton, Mason Plumlee, Juancho Hernangomez, and Malik Beasley
Hornets will get realistic chances to reach the playoff with these guys, and a good starting position to hold expiring ones. Denver will not be in a position to fight for these guys next summer anyway because of cap problems, and Bridges under rookie contract next two seasons will be more valuable for us than Barton because of the same reason.
So how does that fit the Nuggets, gives us cap space relief and Bridges but Barton is playing his best basketball of his career, Plumlee is a bit better than Bismack and the cap relief is negligible. Williams either moves Grant out of backup PF (and I'm not crazy with him at SF fighting with Bridges there) or relagates him to the bench so is Miles Bridges worth both Beasley and Juancho ??? Not seeing how this helps us, more of a lateral move at best IMO
Texas Chuck wrote:I'd like to see Utah, and Denver lose
Snidely FC wrote:CHA fan would like to swap Maliks, Monk for Beasley...
though if DEN wants someone in return for Beasley who will help win in playoffs this year:
Marvin Williams (expiring, 40% from 3, defense, terrific veteran presence),) + Monk for Plumlee + Beasley?
Plug in Biyombo (expiring, rim protection), MKG (expiring, defensive wing), or Cody Zeller (>Plumlee) instead of Marvin if preferred
any interest?
Bismack Biyombo, Marvin Williams, and Miles Bridges for Will Barton, Mason Plumlee, Juancho Hernangomez, and Malik Beasley
Hornets will get realistic chances to reach the playoff with these guys, and a good starting position to hold expiring ones. Denver will not be in a position to fight for these guys next summer anyway because of cap problems, and Bridges under rookie contract next two seasons will be more valuable for us than Barton because of the same reason.
So how does that fit the Nuggets, gives us cap space relief and Bridges but Barton is playing his best basketball of his career, Plumlee is a bit better than Bismack and the cap relief is negligible. Williams either moves Grant out of backup PF (and I'm not crazy with him at SF fighting with Bridges there) or relagates him to the bench so is Miles Bridges worth both Beasley and Juancho ??? Not seeing how this helps us, more of a lateral move at best IMO
This move is focused on 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons, where having 2-3 starter level players under rookie contract (Bridges, MPJ, Bol?) can be a crucial thing for the team with already 2 max players and another 20M player. After that, (for the start) we can easily re-sign Grant next summer and offer Millsap fair 20/2 veteran deal. And this season it would less damage our playoff chances than it seems because Barton played his career-best month in November, but he is still player which game style does not fit well to Jokic point-center game. Well-improving Bridges and minutes increasing MPJ would be a solid replacement for him, and if Biyombo can't replace Plumlee minutes properly, thanks to M.Williams, some extra minutes on the center spot can play Millsap and Grant, or even Bol Bol already.
Snidely FC wrote:CHA fan would like to swap Maliks, Monk for Beasley...
though if DEN wants someone in return for Beasley who will help win in playoffs this year:
Marvin Williams (expiring, 40% from 3, defense, terrific veteran presence),) + Monk for Plumlee + Beasley?
Plug in Biyombo (expiring, rim protection), MKG (expiring, defensive wing), or Cody Zeller (>Plumlee) instead of Marvin if preferred
any interest?
We're probably better off staying with what we have. The potential improvement isn't enough to risk our chemistry. Thanks for the offer.
Curious if you see any chemistry issue with Beasley since turning down the 3/30M offer? seems to have fallen out of favor, if PT is any indication; Beasley big favorite of mine in the '16 draft I remember he was lauded as a super kid, and last year seemed like a rising star, so wondering if there is friction that makes him tradable, has his game regressed, or is he just odd man out in your very deep backcourt?
Snidely FC wrote:CHA fan would like to swap Maliks, Monk for Beasley...
though if DEN wants someone in return for Beasley who will help win in playoffs this year:
Marvin Williams (expiring, 40% from 3, defense, terrific veteran presence),) + Monk for Plumlee + Beasley?
Plug in Biyombo (expiring, rim protection), MKG (expiring, defensive wing), or Cody Zeller (>Plumlee) instead of Marvin if preferred
any interest?
We're probably better off staying with what we have. The potential improvement isn't enough to risk our chemistry. Thanks for the offer.
Curious if you see any chemistry issue with Beasley since turning down the 3/30M offer? seems to have fallen out of favor, if PT is any indication; Beasley big favorite of mine in the '16 draft I remember he was lauded as a super kid, and last year seemed like a rising star, so wondering if there is friction that makes him tradable, has his game regressed, or is he just odd man out in your very deep backcourt?
We have heard no rumors of chemistry/lockerroom issues.
Quite a few of us like Beasley too but he just seems the odd man out. His defense and consistency were a problem last year IMO. He's shown quite a bit of improvement on the defensive end. Consistency can be difficult to develop when you don't get consistent time, so I'm not sure how much that has hurt him. But again, that's just my opinion.
Harris is a fantastic defensive player and that's coach's focus this year (more than ever). When you add in that Barton is a SG playing mostly SF (but some SG) and add in Murray who is a combo-guard and 2nd year player Morris showing more consistency - Beasley just appears to be the fifth guard.
Some fans would like to see him start instead of Harris and some believe that just might happen by the end of the year (although I think it unlikely). Denver gambled on him even though he was injured coming out of college. It seems they are going to continue that gamble because of his potential. But other teams are clearly interested, so for the right offer, Denver just might trade him.
THE J0KER wrote:Very interesting CHI-DEN deal, I must say. But reason why I want to stay with MPJ gamble is two more years under rookie contract, which would be key factor in our cap flexibility to do something big ASAP if he will have breakthrough in 2020. Also, I guess we would lose Grant next summer because of that deal.
But if Chicago wants to give Markkanen chance, next deal would be possible:
Harris, Barton, Plumlee, Beasley, Juancho, Bol for LaVine and Otto Porter
I think that is a huge overpay for Lavine and Porter, I wouldn't trade Harris straight up for Lavine. As good as Lavine has been on offense, Harris has been that and more on defense. Last I checked he was giving up 33.5% shooting percentage. Considering he is guarding the other teams best perimeter player for all his minutes that could be a huge argument for Harris as DPOY and at this pace he should be 1st team all defensive team. Lavine is nowhere near a top 5 scorer.
Can you explain to me why so many want a ball dominate guard?
Spoiler:
Lavine has a 5% higher usage than Murray meaning that he either turns over the ball or shoots more than Murray, on a per 36 minute basis Lavine is about 1 ppg at a slightly higher rate but Murray is the better passer (with Jokic and Barton taking a lot of possessions from him), better rebounder, better defender, and turns over the ball less. While you cannot really compare time of possession due to Murray bringing the ball up the court, the average time of possession is 4 seconds per touch with him running isos or pick and roll as the ball handler which is more than anybody on the Nuggets team. I just don't see the value in adding someone who is only a slight upgrade in scoring with a down grade everywhere else, with Jokic being the guy who should be getting those touches as he is clearly the best out of all of them.
Can you explain why so many want iso scorers? I really just don't understand what I am missing.
It is not about the player profile, but about his overall quality. Denver needs TOP40-TOP50 player to add to Jokic and Murray to be playoff competitive against league TOP5 teams. We can fight them in regular-season thanks to our depth, but for the playoff, we need "The Third Man". LaVine contract is team-friendly because he signs it after ACL injury when no guarantee he will improve anymore, so he has the same contract as Gary Harris, which is a legit contender for all-NBA first defensive team this season, but still far away to be called NBA TOP40-TOP50 player (unlike LaVine). Nobody says it must be the guard (only the center doesn't make sense), just another TOP50 player or better. LaVine is not a perfect fit for Jokic and Murray, but who cares? For example, send him on the floor in first and the last 4 minutes of every quarter, and send Jokic and Murray on the first and last 8 minutes of every half, so he will be the real on-floor general and leader of the team in these 15 minutes where Jokic and Murray are out, and for sure not the useless team player when all starters are in the game. Harden and Westbrook are awful fit, but they cover all 48 minutes of Rockets game. Harden FG% efficiency is dropped, but Houston numbers rise. Also, why complaint about LaVine defense, if we get in the same package Otto Porter, potentially great two-way forward? For me, LaVine with 20M contract with MPJ under rookie contract stays is a better package than Markkanen under 25M-30M new contract and Harris with 20M contract.
See, I think we differentiate on what we see the value being of our trade pieces. If you look at the guys we are considering trading, and compare them to guys in similar situations around the league they look like potential great players. Let’s talk about these players.
Beasley was in the top 10 in the league for 3 point shooting last year at 21/22 years old which is considerably more rare than you would expect. Worst case scenario is he is an average starter and best case he is a future all star. Due to depth and the need for defense at SG he is never going to be a starter with Harris here, but teams are begging for a guy with his talent especially at SG. He put up 16 points on 40%+ shooting percentage as a start last year, that kind of talent is rare and this year he has shown he is at least a better than average defender.
Harris himself has shown to be a capable 3rd scorer on a good team while being all 1st team defender. He is on a fair contract, but has obviously struggled with being made the 5th option in Denver. Oddly with Millsap missing so many minutes and Harris getting more touches Harris is showing that he is still more than capable of scoring.
Hernangomez was a 40% 3 point shooter and has great advanced stats for his career. While the bench has obvious chemistry issues and a huge problem with too many players, it is obvious that he is a capable rotation guy with potential to be a long term starter in this league.
Morris was 2nd in the league for assist to turnover last season and arguably a top 3 bench PG in the league last year which was basically his rookie year. He has shown to be effective at carrying some scoring load and running an offense, and I am sure there are teams that would love to have him as a starter right now.
Porter JR was the number 1 prospect and was considered a top 5 pick after missing most of his college season and needing that 2nd surgery. While I would not say that he has proven he can stay healthy, at this point he has already shown that he can very effectively score and that with some work on his defense he could become a star pretty easily.
Bol was considered an early lottery pick before teams started 2nd guessing themselves because he needs a lot of work. He has played well in the Dleague in limited minutes and has a ton of potential.
Now let’s look at the veterans
Barton is a terrible 1st scoring option, he is below average at best. When he plays like a 3rd option he is an above average scorer and with his defense has shown the ability to be a solid veteran for a young team or a great 6th man off the bench. .
Plumlee is a proven starting quality Center, and is a large expiring contract. While there are not a lot of teams who need starting Center, the ones that do desperately need a starting Center.
Millsap is one of the largest expiring contracts in league history, and has shown to be a very good spot up shooter and defender around the league. Especially since he has been a good lockerroom guy years ago.
Go look at what stars bring for trades, and look at past trades while comparing what we are sending out with what guys brought. We can easily put together a package for an all star. We need a number 1 scorer, but we need a number 1 scorer that does not have to have the ball in his hands to be effective. We have a true MVP type star in Jokic, and we have a guy who can be a good 3rd star, with a couple of guys in MPJ and Bol who look to have superstar potential. I will only take a ball dominate scorer if he is better than Jokic, and there are not many around the league that I would consider to be better than Jokic. So I want a true scorer that can be what we need to win more than a handful of playoff games.
Right now it does not appear that one is available, so I will settle for someone that has shown the ability to be a good number 1 option on a decent team in limited opportunity while also fitting our offense and defense. I have made no secret of the fact that I would love Beal, but he is not even trade eligible this year. Otto Porter JR is a very good defender, that is true but last year when he got to Chicago and was the number 2 option he was looking like an allstar. This year back at the 3rd option he did not look as good.
People overrate the value of draft picks and dramatically underrate the value of proven young players. In your offer you are giving up a guy who should be in the conversation for DPOY that is not yet in his prime, a young SG with all star potential, a guy who can easily be a rotation player for the Bulls for the next 10 years, a young guy with superstar potential who only dropped due to a foot injury and has proven to be a great prospect in limited time in the dleague, and you a giving up arguably the best backup C in the league and a proven 6th man around the league. For that we are getting a scorer who is terrible at defense, is not good enough to carry his teams to wins, and is a bad fit on offense. We are also getting a guy who a year ago was salary dumped for expiring contracts and has had issues this year. Sorry I do not see any reason to do that deal.
I understand we may have to overpay for a player partially due to stars not wanting to come here and/or even available at this point, but I do not understand overpaying for someone who is a bad fit for what we need.
As for the Rockets, most people who have been watching them all say that they are easily worse this year than last year, but Harden has been carrying them. A lot of teams have fallen off, but I would say that a team that likely is not going to be a conference finals team is the team we should emulate.
jayu70 wrote:Hawks fan here....what are you looking for for Beasley and Hernangomez?
I think they are more looking at a trade to combine talent, but if they have to move them for something else than I can see it taking a high upside guy who good picks.
Snidely FC wrote:
NuggetsWY wrote:
Spoiler:
Snidely FC wrote:CHA fan would like to swap Maliks, Monk for Beasley...
though if DEN wants someone in return for Beasley who will help win in playoffs this year:
Marvin Williams (expiring, 40% from 3, defense, terrific veteran presence),) + Monk for Plumlee + Beasley?
Plug in Biyombo (expiring, rim protection), MKG (expiring, defensive wing), or Cody Zeller (>Plumlee) instead of Marvin if preferred
any interest?
We're probably better off staying with what we have. The potential improvement isn't enough to risk our chemistry. Thanks for the offer.
Curious if you see any chemistry issue with Beasley since turning down the 3/30M offer? seems to have fallen out of favor, if PT is any indication; Beasley big favorite of mine in the '16 draft I remember he was lauded as a super kid, and last year seemed like a rising star, so wondering if there is friction that makes him tradable, has his game regressed, or is he just odd man out in your very deep backcourt?
From all reports all our guys get along great and nobody has a bad attitude in the lockerroom.
Beasley is just stuck behind guys who fit what Malone wants better. He has plenty of talent, but even last year he really only got into the rotation due to injuries. He is going to be a very good player when he gets some actual rotation minutes, but I do not think it will happen in Denver.
The real issue is that the Hornets really do not have anybody that fits our needs. Malik Monk is just too much of a downgrade and I do not see the upside to getting him and allowing him to develop another year.
- I have a very high opinion about Beasley, but the fact is he will leave Denver this Summer anyway. There are several teams around the league ready to play him 25+ minutes, even to give him a starter's role already next season, and ready to pay him more than Denver where his playing time dropped to 15mpg and he even missed already over 5 games by coach decision. - The similar case we have with Juancho, which also expiring this season, already missed over 5 games by Malone decision, and his playing time is under 15mpg so far. - Barton playing over all (my) expectations so far this season, but he is still not a good fit for Jokic game IMO, and his current shape makes him look like a good asset in the eventual deal.
Knowing all that our FO should offer some big package that involving all these three players which will be much more useful to new team than in Denver right now, and gets one (semi)star player, and very respectable offensive 3rd option to be added to Jokic and Murray. If we can get two semi-star players, like LaVine and Otto Porter, of course, that Harris should be added to our offer because we can't pay (in that case) backup guard 20M once we get a better SG, even if Harris is 20M worthy thanks to his defensive skills. As you know I never complained about Plumlee qualities as a basketball player, but he playing in Denver 16mpg, so he is not worthy 14M IN DENVER.
Denver has too many very good and/or very talented players on the bench, and Denver needs for his better playoff chances to add Jokic and Murray third notable offensive option. That would be solved with one big offer (several assets despite we don't have picks to offer anymore) for one great new starter, or even bigger package which includes Harris, if we get two new starters (including guard ones). That is logic which I follow in these my trade speculations.
Manolito wrote:What about Aaron Gordon x Barton + Beasley + Juancho?
Before we signed Grant I would be all in for this deal, but now I'm not so sure, mostly because Gordon dropped his level compared to how he played last season. But in general, this is the type of deal I want to promote this season before the trade deadline: several goods for one better.
I still can't believe we went from not even a thought of trading Malik Beasley before season into mid-season him being on the trading block and getting DNPs. Crazy how quickly things change.
