2021-22 Season/Offseason Speculation

RunDogGun · Post #3561 » by **RunDogGun** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 3:15 pm

I would rather move on from Tyshon, and get a g/f with some insane hops, who is solid at defense. It is the only thing we don't have is a high flyer. Since we just picked up a guy for his shooting, why not do something else for that spot, and then sign someone like Kyle for the second spot.

Post #3562 » by **Qwigglez** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 4:36 pm

Been seeing this trade "rumor" and wanted to see the boards opinion of it...

Suns get-
Brandon Ingram

Pelicans get-
Jae Crowder
Cam Johnson
Dario Saric
Jalen Smith
2024 1st Round pick
2025 1st Round pick swap
2026 1st Round pick

Saw it on a FB page, and thought it was interesting. Funny because I thought the comments would be filled with how the Pelicans wouldn't do it, but most of the comments are about how lazy Ingram is and how the Suns shouldn't do it. :lol:

Seeing how it's the off-season, what do you all think? Personally... I'd love for the Suns to get another go-to scorer and I think Ingram would be ideal, but man I don't want to lose Cam Johnson. I'd probably do it, though no way Sarver would be okay doing this financially with Bridges and Ayton also likely getting a huge deal.

grumpysaddle · Post #3563 » by **grumpysaddle** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 4:47 pm

That's way too much for Ingram. No thanks.

SunsLyf3 · Post #3564 » by **SunsLyf3** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 4:48 pm

That would be a fantastic acquisition.
CP3-Book-Mikal-Ingram-DA is a WCF at the very least.

ImNotMcDiSwear · Post #3565 » by **ImNotMcDiSwear** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 4:50 pm

I saw this, and agree it's quite unimaginable from the Pels' perspective.

Because I am sane, I would of course approve 1000%. Ingram gives us that third star we will desperately need post-Paul, and in the meantime legitimizes us a contender. I know a lot of people think we're already legitimate contenders, but let's be real: we haven't improved this offseason. As far as defense is concerned, I'd like to think Monty could get the most out of Ingram. And as for depth - well. We're already anticipating that we'll target some worthy buyout candidates. This trade would open up a slot.

... But I have to think that if this were a real option, it would have already happened. If the Pels are looking to deal Ingram, I imagine they have better options than Cam Johnson and scrap.

RunDogGun · Post #3566 » by **RunDogGun** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 4:51 pm

How much does Ingram make? But three draft picks along with Johnson, is just too much, for me. All our pf are going in that deal as well. But still an interesting trade idea.

ImNotMcDiSwear · Post #3567 » by **ImNotMcDiSwear** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 4:58 pm

The only FRP I'd be even remotely concerned about is the 2026, since Book could conceivably leave us in 2025. That becomes much less likely, I think, if Ingram is here. That '25 swap is probably worthless. In a perfect world, we're talking about CamJo, Crowder,, Smith and a couple picks in the 25-30 range for Ingram. I just don't see how one could reasonably object to that.

Ghost of Kleine · Post #3568 » by **Ghost of Kleine** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 4:59 pm

Spoiler:

Nader is definitely good, But not sure I'd say he's better than all three mentioned above. At the minimum, I'd find them to be very comparable in terms of overall value. I mean were talking about 3rd rotation 2/3s' after all. And at the minimum, You can't really have too much depth! Now we had legitimate depth of course last season and in the playoffs. But in all honesty, we didn't even utilize them as much as we could have. I realize that was Monty's call due to percieved mismatches not being in our favor. But then again, We'll never know if that was the right call or if those players might have had a definitive impact in the playoffs for us.

As for the rotation issues, Seeing as how we haven't yet addressed our depth needs fully at the 4/5 and as you say yourself, Smith till proven otherwise will be viewed as the weak link, Then I for my part see Cam Johnson logging more time at the backup 4 or interchangeably with Crowder at that position. Meaning that Bridges would be our starting 3, With znade4 being our backup 3. Shamet of course being our backup 2. So I could see our rotation shaking out ( until further adjustments) something like this:

- Paul/ Payne/ Payton.
- Booker/ Shamet/ One of the above mentioned vet minimum players??
- Bridges/ Nader/ One of the above mentioned players?
- Crowder/ Johnson/ Smith.
- Ayton/ McGee/ Kaminsky.
** I see Tyshon Alexander spending a bit more time in the G league this season, Or else being included in a deal around the deadline for a bigger returning piece?

Now of course they could increase playing time for Cam / Nader interchangeably at the 3/ 4. But wouldn't it be better to have them fully fresh for the playoffs and not worn out? More importantly would be having the legitimate depth again ( in case of injury) to actually sustain any success we build upon going into the season as opposed to it possibly getting impacted by potential injury.

Now the belief was that Galloway and Carter didn't play due to lack of overall size, making them defensive liabilities for us. But with any of these 3 veteran minimum options mentioned above, They all have good size, are strong, and very athletic with good to really good (lockdown) defensive potential. Which is really what we could've used in the playoffs to slow down certain players. These players have a developing r er reputation for strong defense. But they also can score productively too.

IF they of course sign Alexander, I'll be really cool with that. But IF they don't, And don't intend to trade for an impact vet, Then I see one of these 3 veteran wing ( 2/3) options as great value and a really solid/ smart insurance policy honestly. And lastly, adding any of these players would give us additional tangible assets to include in a trade ( at the deadline perhaps) along with Saric or whoever for a bigger impact player that may actually be able to help put us over finally?? But we do need more assets outside of our top 6-7 players for such purposes. We can have these players build up their value in certain situations/ games and then flip them in a trade for a more premium returning piece for our finals run!

matt131 · Post #3569 » by **matt131** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 5:00 pm

That's almost too much if it were Zion instead of Ingram. Helllllll no

RunDogGun · Post #3570 » by **RunDogGun** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 5:04 pm

We haven't really explored all that Johnson can do, I just think in that particular trade, we are losing too much. What are they going to do with all those pfs? If we had picked up Milsap, then maybe it would work itself out. Still an interesting trade idea.

WeekapaugGroove · Post #3571 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 5:26 pm

Ingram is a hard guy for me to figure out. Like in theory he should be a good defender with his length and athletism but he's never actually been one. Very talented offensive player, would some of that be wasted paired with a guy like Booker and then you have to figure a maxed out Ayton is going to want more touches as he develops? Also Ingram is pretty used to getting to initiate offense and on a team with Booker and Paul there just wouldn't be much opportunity for him to do that.

That trade package mentioned has too many 1sts but all in all is intriguing because top end talent wins and Ingram has a lot of talent.

But there is a part of me that wonders if Ingram will always be a very good player that you kind to wish was just a little better.

Off topic but if Portland get to the point where they actually have to trade Dame I'd say Ingram plus some picks/young guys could end up the best deal they'll find.
Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

Saberestar · Post #3572 » by **Saberestar** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 5:33 pm

The Pelicans are not trading an All Star on a long term deal entering his prime.

He needs to say that he hates the organization and ask for a trade before they start to entertain some high offers.

Barkley6 · Post #3573 » by **Barkley6** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 5:45 pm

Ty-Shon is more than just a shooter. He's also rated as a high caliber defender and part time point guard. He'll need some time to develop, but if you watched him in summer league, you can see that there is an NBA player in there.

Barkley6 · Post #3574 » by **Barkley6** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 5:55 pm

Too much for me. 3 1sts, a former lottery pick and 3 rotation guys? That's more than we gave up to get Charles Barkley.

Granted I realize Saric is hurt, so that lowers his value. But that's A LOT to give up for a guy who essentially is just a scorer. His Per36 rebounding numbers are a putrid 5.1, and he's not a great defender.

It also kills our depth and means we'd likely need to make more moves, and while this opens up roster spots, guys we COULD have pursued are now gone. It would have made A LOT more sense to make this move at the start of FA and then used FA to fill the gaps we created. It makes almost zero sense now.

ImNotMcDiSwear · Post #3575 » by **ImNotMcDiSwear** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 6:18 pm

I don't think Ty-Shon is anything special. He's got good feel and lots of physical tools, but he could use some seasoning overseas. A few years down the line, sure, I could see him cracking the league. Right now, I wouldn't be sad to lose him, though I don't see a need to push for it unless a better player is available for that two-way spot.

cberry78 · Post #3576 » by **cberry78** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 6:27 pm

Hard no for me, that's way too much for Ingram.

And isn't that essentially more than the Lakers gave up for AD?

https://lebronwire.usatoday.com/2021/06/15/on-this-day-pelicans-trade-anthony-davis-to-lakers-in-blockbuster-move/

Post #3577 » by **bwgood77** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 6:53 pm

I don't know if either team would do it, and at first I thought it was an overpay by the Suns. It probably is, but it depends on how good those picks are, specifically the 2026, but that's far off. That and Cam are the main things that bother me as far as assets going out.

But the main reasons this wouldn't happen are:

1: It would KILL our depth for now and the future..we'd have way too much invested in 5 players including 3 max guys going forward. You can build around that, but not when you don't have any draft picks. Our bench frontcourt would be non existent. I guess we'd have 1 year of McGee, but Nader as primary backup 3/4 and no backup 5 going forward after this year?

2: The Pelicans actually do need depth but they also need star power. Cam and Jae are pretty good fits with Zion but I don't know if you could play all 3 together so one would have to come off the bench. Dario would be a good fit with Zion but he's out too. So essentially they would be trading an all star for one starter and 3 bench players.

Unless you play Cam at the 2, which is possible. Paul George plays the 2.

So they could go Graham, Cam, Crowder, Zion, JV

They really need Kira Lewis Jr to become starter capable. I think Graham is better as a bench guy like Josh Hart.

Anyway, I think the Pelicans need the best starting lineup they can get since they only have 2 high quality starters and with this trade, it would be down to 1.

And for the Suns, we don't need another big scorer in our starting lineup. Bridges probably already deserves more shots due to his efficiency and developing game. Ayton probably deserves more touches too. If we can get those two guys more touches it will make us better since they are our most efficient players.

Ghost of Kleine · Post #3578 » by **Ghost of Kleine** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 6:56 pm

Spoiler:

We only have one roster spot available, we need to use it on a good player no guys like them who will play in G-League or whoknowswheretheywillgo.

There are players as good as Avery Bradley, James Ennis, Paul Millsap, Stanley Johnson and many more waiting for his opportunity on any team. We can get any of these players for the minimum, only nine teams have some open roster spot.

I wouldn't sign a player worse than them. Like Barkley6 wrote Nader is better than those players that you listed.

We only have one roster spot available, we need to use it on a good player no guys like them who will play in G-League or whoknowswheretheywillgo.

I really think that people are undervaluing the potential impact that any of these players could have for our team's depth. Especially if they came at the minimum. There are a bunch of good players that often come out of the Gleague and have legitimate impact for team's that took a chance on them, So I think it's important to not look at playing in the GLeague as a legitimate disqualifier for consideration. For instance, You have players such as Khris Middleton, Pascal Siakim, Jordan Clarkson, Robert Covington, Danny Green, Fred VanVleet, Christian Wood, Duncan Robinson, Hassan Whiteside, Rudy Gobert, Kendrick Nunn, and even JJ Barrea and many others have either come from the GLeague or spent time in the GLeague developing before actually becoming impact players for their teams. And with the exception of maybe Wood, Have had a significant impact or played a significant role in the playoffs for their teams. And some of those very good players at one time were actually in that " whoknowswhere they'llgo" category. But once given their chance to shine, were able to make an impact an make a name for themselves. All players start somewhere after all. And not all impact players were obvious at the time.

There are players as good as Avery Bradley, James Ennis, Paul Millsap, Stanley Johnson and many more waiting for his opportunity on any team. We can get any of these players for the minimum, only nine teams have some open roster spot.

I hear you on that there are obviously a plethora of unsigned veteran players for consideration. But would any of those players mentioned actually be better or provide a greater or more substantial impact than the three that I've proposed?

Avery Bradley is still a reasonably decent defender, Honestly on par with Carter these days in that he's undersized, Can't really guard bigger players. But plays solid 1 on 1 defense against smaller guards, But really struggles against bigger guards. Also, Even though he's a career 36% three point shooter, He's not been good getting to the rim, or in the midrange. He's still savvy though, and for the minimum could provide decent value. But in comparison to the players I've mentioned, He's undersized and not as strong or athletic or productive offensively anymore.

James Ennis He's actually a player that I really like and wouldn't be at all upset with for the minimum as he's got good size at 6'7 and is a career 36% three point shooter. And he plays with a definite edge, Even at 31. So for the minimum, I'd definitely be on board with signing him. Additionally, The bonus of preventing the Flakers from getting him ( as they've recently been considering him along with Isiah Thomas) for one of their hundred signings it seems! :roll:

Paul Milsap
I'd like Millsap as a mentor to Smith and as a steadying, strong presence off the bench. But it doesn't sound like he's intending to sign for the veteran's minimum. It seems like he's expecting something in the MLE range. Now do I think he'll get that, Not likely at all. But in that I also don't see us offering him more than the veteran's minimum anyways, I don't consider him a legitimate consideration for this premise of vet minimum 3rd rotation value depth considerations.

Stanley Johnson
Stanley Johnson is definitely a very good defender on the wing and in the post. However, he's currently still only a one way player. In that his offense is still really bad, and he'd be a liability on the offensive end. He'd be decent in that specific defensive role. And for the minimum, I'd definitely be open to it. But I wouldn't prioritize him above the 3 options that I mentioned above, Because all of those players are strong defenders, BUT ALSO productive scorers on offense as well. So they'd provide more two way versatility for us.

I wouldn't sign a player worse than them. Like Barkley6 wrote Nader is better than those players that you listed.
I still don't see the three players I've mentioned as being worse than the the ones you've mentioned, Or Nader for that matter either. All are also very good athletes, strong multipositional defenders, And productive on offense. So at the very least they'd provide equitable value to that of Nader or any of the above mentioned, if not more in certain situations. :dontknow:

Frank Lee · Post #3579 » by **Frank Lee** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 6:57 pm

IMO, your 11 thru 15 benchers need not get much playing time at all, except in the case of injury. These slots need to be filled with promising youngsters you are cultivating. Not pay checking laststopping vets (see Moore,Galloway, Shank fn again and in a timely manner, GoKs list above :wink:

) These longtoothers have little to no value in trade land and are such marginal contributors on the court. Seems the only thing Jones wants is for them to mediocrely fill the minutes. And as far as the youngguns go….their stay should be brief if they do not show out. No reason why we haven’t retained the summer league big Alexander, or signed Perry, or even kept a second drat pick and had a dude like Sandro. This ‘Pet the Vet’ conservatism from Jones leaves his cupboards bare to make trades and keeps the prospect ceiling low. Right now, we don’t have any prospects who are actively pushing for playing time or ones that other teams would actually want. And it looks as if Jones is holding a spot for another washed elder. We have a fairly solid 1-10, Ateam Bteam rotation, but 11-15 (excluding Saric here) is like vegamite on toast… nobody wants it, but there’s always a few who’ll swear it’s good.

Mulhollanddrive · Post #3580 » by **Mulhollanddrive** » Wed Aug 18, 2021 8:20 pm

Ingram too small at PF.

Grade the Suns off-season moves so far