Klay Thompson tore ACL?

[Dub_Sax]

Well GSW going after oubre now

Sent from my SM-G955U using RealGM mobile app

[Bensational]

Fournier for the TPE and a lottery protected 1st sounds good. Or lottery protected, with conditional provisions where if both picks fall to the lottery it becomes a pick swap and we get the best.

Sign TLC for the MLE to replace Fournier.

Or... Fournier + Aminu for Wiggins? I certainly would.

Hell if we are getting that crazy why not go Fournier + Aminu + filler for Westbrook?

I'm glad neither will happen

What's crazy about it if the Warriors bite? We're not positioned to be a team with cap space in the future, so Wiggins becomes a max contract trade piece whilst we hope he can continue to develop and improve even this far into his career.

And Westbrook would instantly be the best player on the team and likely lift us into playoff contention - so again, what's the problem with that? Not my preferred move, but versus running out the same squad for another year which just drastically underperformed it's own overachieving standards just a year before?

I'll put out a hot take. If the Warriors keep Wiggins and he has to step up as Curry's #2, then he will and his value is going to skyrocket. He won't be Klay, but he'll prove he can be good enough to be a top scorer on a winning team. And then everyone will be saying "oh, we should've traded for Wiggins when his value was low...", or "we should clear cap space for when Wiggins is a free agent!".

Meanwhile, the running mantra is - "more of the same please!". Really? That's going to satisfy you as a Magic fan?

[TheGlyde]

Fournier for the TPE and a lottery protected 1st sounds good. Or lottery protected, with conditional provisions where if both picks fall to the lottery it becomes a pick swap and we get the best.

Sign TLC for the MLE to replace Fournier.

Or... Fournier + Aminu for Wiggins? I certainly would.

Hell if we are getting that crazy why not go Fournier + Aminu + filler for Westbrook?

I'm glad neither will happen

What's crazy about it if the Warriors bite? We're not positioned to be a team with cap space in the future, so Wiggins becomes a max contract trade piece whilst we hope he can continue to develop and improve even this far into his career.

And Westbrook would instantly be the best player on the team and likely lift us into playoff contention - so again, what's the problem with that? Not my preferred move, but versus running out the same squad for another year which just drastically underperformed it's own overachieving standards just a year before?

I'll put out a hot take. If the Warriors keep Wiggins and he has to step up as Curry's #2, then he will and his value is going to skyrocket. He won't be Klay, but he'll prove he can be good enough to be a top scorer on a winning team. And then everyone will be saying "oh, we should've traded for Wiggins when his value was low...", or "we should clear cap space for when Wiggins is a free agent!".

Meanwhile, the running mantra is - "more of the same please!". Really? That's going to satisfy you as a Magic fan?

What satisfies me is accumulating positive assets and tradeable contracts, of which we have plenty, and moving on them when the time is right. Not making knee jerk reactional moves Hennigan style.

Wiggins is not that. Westbrook at his age and contract is certainly not that.

I've stated many places I don't want more of the same, but as I said, right moves at the right time.

Aminu is a bad contract and I would love to be rid of it, but he could maybe play his value up while Isaac is out.

Fournier has to be moved, can't let him walk for nothing, but giving yourself zero forward flexibility in trades by taking on bad contracts, inefficient players and hitting the luxury tax is not the way.

Gordon, should also go, but only if/when:
- Aminu plays up to his contract
- Okeke shows promise or
- Isaac is back

Otherwise, he is needed.

[Bensational]

Hell if we are getting that crazy why not go Fournier + Aminu + filler for Westbrook?

I'm glad neither will happen

What's crazy about it if the Warriors bite? We're not positioned to be a team with cap space in the future, so Wiggins becomes a max contract trade piece whilst we hope he can continue to develop and improve even this far into his career.

And Westbrook would instantly be the best player on the team and likely lift us into playoff contention - so again, what's the problem with that? Not my preferred move, but versus running out the same squad for another year which just drastically underperformed it's own overachieving standards just a year before?

I'll put out a hot take. If the Warriors keep Wiggins and he has to step up as Curry's #2, then he will and his value is going to skyrocket. He won't be Klay, but he'll prove he can be good enough to be a top scorer on a winning team. And then everyone will be saying "oh, we should've traded for Wiggins when his value was low...", or "we should clear cap space for when Wiggins is a free agent!".

Meanwhile, the running mantra is - "more of the same please!". Really? That's going to satisfy you as a Magic fan?

What satisfies me is accumulating positive assets and tradeable contracts, of which we have plenty, and moving on them when the time is right. Not making knee jerk reactional moves Hennigan style.

Wiggins is not that. Westbrook at his age and contract is certainly not that.

I've stated many places I don't want more of the same, but as I said, right moves at the right time.

Aminu is a bad contract and I would love to be rid of it, but he could maybe play his value up while Isaac is out.

Fournier has to be moved, can't let him walk for nothing, but giving yourself zero forward flexibility in trades by taking on bad contracts, inefficient players and hitting the luxury tax is not the way.

Gordon, should also go, but only if/when:
- Aminu plays up to his contract
- Okeke shows promise or
- Isaac is back

Otherwise, he is needed.

Considering the tenure of our players on this team, aren't you beginning to question the actual trade value they have around the league? It seems apparent that our team values them more than others. In the 3 years WeHam have been here they haven't seen an offer they like more than Vuc/Gordon/Fournier/Ross/DJ, but you expect them to be poised to make a deal in the future that's better than a piece like Wiggins or Westbrook? I just don't see it, personally. Not this far in.

[SD2042]

It's horrendous to hear the news that Klay will be out once again for another season. He's a helleva player and one of the good ones. This puts the Warriors on the offensive to plug in the loss for Klay. Who will be that individual is the question.

[TheGlyde]

What's crazy about it if the Warriors bite? We're not positioned to be a team with cap space in the future, so Wiggins becomes a max contract trade piece whilst we hope he can continue to develop and improve even this far into his career.

And Westbrook would instantly be the best player on the team and likely lift us into playoff contention - so again, what's the problem with that? Not my preferred move, but versus running out the same squad for another year which just drastically underperformed it's own overachieving standards just a year before?

I'll put out a hot take. If the Warriors keep Wiggins and he has to step up as Curry's #2, then he will and his value is going to skyrocket. He won't be Klay, but he'll prove he can be good enough to be a top scorer on a winning team. And then everyone will be saying "oh, we should've traded for Wiggins when his value was low...", or "we should clear cap space for when Wiggins is a free agent!".

Meanwhile, the running mantra is - "more of the same please!". Really? That's going to satisfy you as a Magic fan?

What satisfies me is accumulating positive assets and tradeable contracts, of which we have plenty, and moving on them when the time is right. Not making knee jerk reactional moves Hennigan style.

Wiggins is not that. Westbrook at his age and contract is certainly not that.

I've stated many places I don't want more of the same, but as I said, right moves at the right time.

Aminu is a bad contract and I would love to be rid of it, but he could maybe play his value up while Isaac is out.

Fournier has to be moved, can't let him walk for nothing, but giving yourself zero forward flexibility in trades by taking on bad contracts, inefficient players and hitting the luxury tax is not the way.

Gordon, should also go, but only if/when:
- Aminu plays up to his contract
- Okeke shows promise or
- Isaac is back

Otherwise, he is needed.

Considering the tenure of our players on this team, aren't you beginning to question the actual trade value they have around the league? It seems apparent that our team values them more than others. In the 3 years WeHam have been here they haven't seen an offer they like more than Vuc/Gordon/Fournier/Ross/DJ, but you expect them to be poised to make a deal in the future that's better than a piece like Wiggins or Westbrook? I just don't see it, personally. Not this far in.

In one sense I think WeHam are big on the 'better the devil you know' mantra, and they do value continuity quite highly, but for better or worse, I think its a style thing.

They like a certain combination of player, contract, attitude, professionalism etc, and that's just the style of player and team they seek and are trying to build.

For WeHam all those things all have to line up for them to pull the trigger. It means a lot of low risk moves like Fultz, Ennis etc.

Accumulate enough positive assets and then make your all in move. Wiggins and Westbrook aren't the all in move (nor was DeRozan), so you keep accumulating assets until you find it.

[Bensational]

What satisfies me is accumulating positive assets and tradeable contracts, of which we have plenty, and moving on them when the time is right. Not making knee jerk reactional moves Hennigan style.

Wiggins is not that. Westbrook at his age and contract is certainly not that.

I've stated many places I don't want more of the same, but as I said, right moves at the right time.

Aminu is a bad contract and I would love to be rid of it, but he could maybe play his value up while Isaac is out.

Fournier has to be moved, can't let him walk for nothing, but giving yourself zero forward flexibility in trades by taking on bad contracts, inefficient players and hitting the luxury tax is not the way.

Gordon, should also go, but only if/when:
- Aminu plays up to his contract
- Okeke shows promise or
- Isaac is back

Otherwise, he is needed.

Considering the tenure of our players on this team, aren't you beginning to question the actual trade value they have around the league? It seems apparent that our team values them more than others. In the 3 years WeHam have been here they haven't seen an offer they like more than Vuc/Gordon/Fournier/Ross/DJ, but you expect them to be poised to make a deal in the future that's better than a piece like Wiggins or Westbrook? I just don't see it, personally. Not this far in.

In one sense I think WeHam are big on the 'better the devil you know' mantra, and they do value continuity quite highly, but for better or worse, I think its a style thing.

They like a certain combination of player, contract, attitude, professionalism etc, and that's just the style of player and team they seek and are trying to build.

For WeHam all those things all have to line up for them to pull the trigger. It means a lot of low risk moves like Fultz, Ennis etc.

Accumulate enough positive assets and then make your all in move. Wiggins and Westbrook aren't the all in move (nor was DeRozan), so you keep accumulating assets until you find it.

You're gonna have to spell out the positive assets we've been accumulating. It's only an asset if it is providing positively for you, or if it's valued higher externally than you do internally, meaning a profitable trade.

I'm not trying to be a debbie downer on the team (you know me, I can vacillate between bullish and bearish on any given day), but I just don't see a stockpile of assets on this team. Isaac, Fultz, Bamba and even Okeke - all injury concerns. It's 1-2 seasons minimum before any proves enough to be regarded as a positive asset. Anthony is an efficiency concern. Gordon is getting older and settling into a roleplayer role. Vuc is at his peak. Fournier had a career year but still fell apart in the playoffs. Ross is what he is.

I just don't see how we flip those guys for 'the right move', because the right move has to require the other team to truly value that. If you were another team would you want to give up anything valuable for our pieces which struggle to be a .500 team?

[TheGlyde]

Considering the tenure of our players on this team, aren't you beginning to question the actual trade value they have around the league? It seems apparent that our team values them more than others. In the 3 years WeHam have been here they haven't seen an offer they like more than Vuc/Gordon/Fournier/Ross/DJ, but you expect them to be poised to make a deal in the future that's better than a piece like Wiggins or Westbrook? I just don't see it, personally. Not this far in.

In one sense I think WeHam are big on the 'better the devil you know' mantra, and they do value continuity quite highly, but for better or worse, I think its a style thing.

They like a certain combination of player, contract, attitude, professionalism etc, and that's just the style of player and team they seek and are trying to build.

For WeHam all those things all have to line up for them to pull the trigger. It means a lot of low risk moves like Fultz, Ennis etc.

Accumulate enough positive assets and then make your all in move. Wiggins and Westbrook aren't the all in move (nor was DeRozan), so you keep accumulating assets until you find it.

You're gonna have to spell out the positive assets we've been accumulating. It's only an asset if it is providing positively for you, or if it's valued higher externally than you do internally, meaning a profitable trade.

I'm not trying to be a debbie downer on the team (you know me, I can vacillate between bullish and bearish on any given day), but I just don't see a stockpile of assets on this team. Isaac, Fultz, Bamba and even Okeke - all injury concerns. It's 1-2 seasons minimum before any proves enough to be regarded as a positive asset. Anthony is an efficiency concern. Gordon is getting older and settling into a roleplayer role. Vuc is at his peak. Fournier had a career year but still fell apart in the playoffs. Ross is what he is.

I just don't see how we flip those guys for 'the right move', because the right move has to require the other team to truly value that. If you were another team would you want to give up anything valuable for our pieces which struggle to be a .500 team?

The big contracts are all treadeable.

Fournier is an expiring contract coming off a career year. So if I was on another team who was looking to clear long term money for the 2021 FA class in a cash strapped NBA, or if I was on a contending team around deadline time looking for a vet to help put my team over the top, I'd be interested.

Vuc is at his peak value after the Bucks series (everyone forgotten his play?). He's a modern NBA center and is on a very tradeable, descending contract.

Gordon is also on a descending contract, and these contracts are part of what makes them positive assets, but right now his value is low, which is why with Isaac out I would see if he can play his trade value into a more positive position before moving him.

A combination of role, contract status and playoff experience makes all three more positive assets now than what they were when WeHam took over.

Ross could have some value to a contender like Fournier but I think his contract length puts him as having minimal external value right now.

Aminu, negative value currently, no doubt.

Everyone knows Isaac is a major positive asset, John Hollinger rates him as close to a max player even with his injuries.

Fultz is a major positive asset compared to the assets we gave up for him (accumulation, ie increasing value of one asset to the next).

Bamba/Okeke/Anthony, jury is out, but value is not negative, the rest, negligible value either way.

[pepe1991]

Just spoke with a guy with college degree in Kinesiology and he pretty much from gates told me "Klay is done" .

And once you start thinking about it, he probably is.
Klay, 31, will be out for at least one whole calendar year, and at this point he will be 32. Stlll not old. But in same time that will mean he spent outside of basketball around 30 months. His body at this stage will struggle A LOT to return to playing shape, and even if he does, it's objective to expect shell of former self -type of player he will be.

We don't talk about some minor injuries here, we talk about pontentially career ending ACL tear and achillies tear - in back to back injuries. His legs simply didn't hold up and gave up on him.


Even if somehow turns into miracle and returns. It will be too late for Warriors. Curry is older and already banged up.

Addition of Wiseman, Oubre, Wiggins really doesn't do much other than prolongs invictable rebuild that is looming. ( Wiggins and Oubre actually will help tanking if not anything else).

It's sad end of transending NBA duo that transformed modern offense into 3 point frenzy by themselfs.