Trade Talk (Part Eight)

[KGdaBom]

True, but when Jaden McDaniels is the sticking point for a young all star that's just wrong.

We honestly don't know that to be the case. For some fans of this team, it is. For Rosas...

Right. Hopefully Rosas has more common sense than many RealGM posters.

[KGdaBom]

You are creating a hole at PG, a much harder hole to fill, that often takes years of development. So, no. I wouldn't sabotage ourselves like that and waste the prime years of KAT without some kind of stability there.

The PG hole is going to be filled by Ben. The guy that is top on the list to find 3pt shooters for example.
And in this case, he's going to be in a way better situation with KAT than Embiid. And a perfect guard in Beverley to play alongside.
There is nothing to sabotage here because we don't have that much to sabotage something.
We have to make moves, real moves. And is not a move of desperation, is to make a move to get better right away.

Another non-playoff season and KAT is demanding a trade at end of the season with 2 years left on his contract, no doubt about that.

Ben is not a PG and I wouldn't want him and would be unwilling to trade for him at all if that is where he is playing. The only place he belongs is PF.

Yeah you're a genius and know this to be true despite him playing many years as PG for the 76ers on very successful teams. I think you take the RealGM thing far too seriously.

[KGdaBom]

It isn't wrong though when that young "all-star" shouldn't be an all-star, hope for improvement is diminished and is paid $35mil.

Since when did it turn to arguing that Ben shouldn't be an all-star?

So Money has spoken. He was never worthy of being an all star.

[KGdaBom]

I understand your attempt at humor but such a bad take. Not a single poster has even hinted at this.

Several of those you are going back and forth with have said they would trade for Simmons. The sticking point is not Simmons, but what the Wolves would have to trade for him.

True, but when Jaden McDaniels is the sticking point for a young all star that's just wrong.

I just wonder what tune you will be humming about McD a year or two from now?

If I'm wrong about the guy I'll admit it to all. I expect the same from you.

Save yourself a lot of crow and just get on board now kgdabom. It took a while but you finally got on board with Ant. You were a Wiseman guy. See? It's OK.

Look at Middleton and Giannis their 1st year.

I was never off board with Ant. Jaden's ceiling is a decent contributing starting player. If he reaches that he will be one of the best 150 players in the world. That is some impressive stuff. Don't try to make him out to be anything more than that. You will look very foolish.

[SO_MONEY]

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/263920/Cavaliers-Looking-For-Wing-Help-Teams-Covet-Larry-Nance-Jr

Nance Jr+Osman for Beasley and Layman

Pass. Don't want the future salary if Osman and I like Beasley more.

[SO_MONEY]

It isn't wrong though when that young "all-star" shouldn't be an all-star, hope for improvement is diminished and is paid $35mil.

Since when did it turn to arguing that Ben shouldn't be an all-star?

So Money has spoken. He was never worthy of being an all star.

I don't think he ever has

[Krapinsky]

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/263920/Cavaliers-Looking-For-Wing-Help-Teams-Covet-Larry-Nance-Jr

Nance Jr+Osman for Beasley and Layman

Pass. Don't want the future salary if Osman and I like Beasley more.

Agreed. Nance Jr is an upgrade on what we got but with him on the roster we’d still be looking for a better long term PF.

[SO_MONEY]

True, but when Jaden McDaniels is the sticking point for a young all star that's just wrong.

I just wonder what tune you will be humming about McD a year or two from now?

If I'm wrong about the guy I'll admit it to all. I expect the same from you.

Save yourself a lot of crow and just get on board now kgdabom. It took a while but you finally got on board with Ant. You were a Wiseman guy. See? It's OK.

Look at Middleton and Giannis their 1st year.

I was never off board with Ant. Jaden's ceiling is a decent contributing starting player. If he reaches that he will be one of the best 150 players in the world. That is some impressive stuff. Don't try to make him out to be anything more than that. You will look very foolish.

Lol. That is not his celling, that is his floor....but at least you can just come out and say you don't think he is any good. It at least makes sense of your position.

[KGdaBom]

I just wonder what tune you will be humming about McD a year or two from now?

If I'm wrong about the guy I'll admit it to all. I expect the same from you.

Save yourself a lot of crow and just get on board now kgdabom. It took a while but you finally got on board with Ant. You were a Wiseman guy. See? It's OK.

Look at Middleton and Giannis their 1st year.

I was never off board with Ant. Jaden's ceiling is a decent contributing starting player. If he reaches that he will be one of the best 150 players in the world. That is some impressive stuff. Don't try to make him out to be anything more than that. You will look very foolish.

Lol. That is not his celling, that is his floor....but at least you can just come out and say you don't think he is any good. It at least makes sense of your position.

You're attributing thoughts to me that I don't have. Didn't you read my post. A decent contributing starting player is quite good. He has a chance to be one of the top 150 players in the world. I think he is very good. Just not good enough to pass on trading for a proven all star.

[SO_MONEY]

I was never off board with Ant. Jaden's ceiling is a decent contributing starting player. If he reaches that he will be one of the best 150 players in the world. That is some impressive stuff. Don't try to make him out to be anything more than that. You will look very foolish.

Lol. That is not his celling, that is his floor....but at least you can just come out and say you don't think he is any good. It at least makes sense of your position.

You're attributing thoughts to me that I don't have. Didn't you read my post. A decent contributing starting player is quite good. He has a chance to be one of the top 150 players in the world. I think he is very good. Just not good enough to pass on trading for a proven all star.

He is already a decent contributing player, so you don't think he is going to be much if any better than he is. That is what you are saying.

Maybe he doesn't become as good as Simmons, maybe he does, but he makes $2mil and he provides more to the team by keeping him than by trading him. Beasley, Naz and a 1st would get you one hell of a player. Beasley or Naz and a 1st gets a very good player. You keep McDaniels. If the first deal gets you Simmons great, if not you target a different player. Either way you round out your starting 5 with that 4th or 5th option by getting the best player you can without overpaying for the role you are looking at.

Frankly, you avoid bringing on a 4th or 5th option making $35mil who will have declining stats due to decreased role especially one who needed the ball in their hands to average 14/7/7, that becomes 12/7/5 pretty quick...or worse.

[Klomp]

Frankly, you avoid bringing on a 4th or 5th option making $35mil who will have declining stats due to decreased role especially one who needed the ball in their hands to average 14/7/7, that becomes 12/7/5 pretty quick...or worse.

Why are we scoffing at even 12/7/5? Those are really good all-around numbers, and show he DOESN'T need the ball in order to be effective.

With Beasley and Russell in and out of the lineup all year, our fourth and fifth options last year were essentially Rubio (8/3/6) and either McDaniels (7/4/1) or Okogie (5/3/1). So Simmons would essentially replace the production of BOTH of them together at the same time.

[SO_MONEY]

Frankly, you avoid bringing on a 4th or 5th option making $35mil who will have declining stats due to decreased role especially one who needed the ball in their hands to average 14/7/7, that becomes 12/7/5 pretty quick...or worse.

Why are we scoffing at even 12/7/5? Those are really good all-around numbers, and show he DOESN'T need the ball in order to be effective.

With Beasley and Russell in and out of the lineup all year, our fourth and fifth options last year were essentially Rubio (8/3/6) and either McDaniels (7/4/1) or Okogie (5/3/1). So Simmons would essentially replace the production of BOTH of them together at the same time.

You are missing "or worse", but whatever...

Because you can get that production give or take for far less commitment and keep some assets as well. It is not a vacuum.

[Klomp]

Because you can get that production give or take for far less commitment and keep some assets as well. It is not a vacuum.

Just because you can doesn't mean you will.

Trade assets are only truly assets if you take advantage of what they're worth. Holding onto them doesn't improve their value over time.

[winforlose]

Because you can get that production give or take for far less commitment and keep some assets as well. It is not a vacuum.

Just because you can doesn't mean you will.

Trade assets are only truly assets if you take advantage of what they're worth. Holding onto them doesn't improve their value over time.

True and not true. True to the extent that inaction has an opportunity cost, but unture to the extent that the players you don’t trade have value and will continue to contribute to your team. Losing multiple good players for a single player is always risky. Beasley and MCD are starter level, losing both means Nowell or Beverly have to move into a starter role, and Okogie or JMAC get more minutes. But now what happens when Nowell gets hurt and you are very short on guards. I cannot stress enough how little money we have available after making a trade for Simmons and we would have multiple roster spots to fill. As we stand now we have moderate depth in every position, after trading for Simmons depending on who we send we are paper thin at between 1-3 positions. Worse still, Simmons ties your hands for years when it comes to rebuilding that depth. With big market teams stealing all the FAs and our draft capital tied up in Simmons (also if we succeed the picks become less likely to be impactful anyway,) we will be paper thin for years. Sometimes trade assets are in fact better left unused until a better value comes along.

[KGdaBom]

Lol. That is not his celling, that is his floor....but at least you can just come out and say you don't think he is any good. It at least makes sense of your position.

You're attributing thoughts to me that I don't have. Didn't you read my post. A decent contributing starting player is quite good. He has a chance to be one of the top 150 players in the world. I think he is very good. Just not good enough to pass on trading for a proven all star.

He is already a decent contributing player, so you don't think he is going to be much if any better than he is. That is what you are saying.

Maybe he doesn't become as good as Simmons, maybe he does, but he makes $2mil and he provides more to the team by keeping him than by trading him. Beasley, Naz and a 1st would get you one hell of a player. Beasley or Naz and a 1st gets a very good player. You keep McDaniels. If the first deal gets you Simmons great, if not you target a different player. Either way you round out your starting 5 with that 4th or 5th option by getting the best player you can without overpaying for the role you are looking at.

Frankly, you avoid bringing on a 4th or 5th option making $35mil who will have declining stats due to decreased role especially one who needed the ball in their hands to average 14/7/7, that becomes 12/7/5 pretty quick...or worse.

7-4-1 are the numbers of a little used reserve. Not a decent contributing starter. He has potential to become that.

[minimus]

I know, we are sick of 1-3-1 scheme. But would you consider this as final offseason deal Layman, top7 protected FRP for Cam Reddish?

KAT/Reid + Knight
Reddish/Vando/MCD
MCD/Prince/Okogie
Edwards/Beasley/Nowell
DLo/Beverly/Bolmaro + Wright

[SCTwins]

I know, we are sick of 1-3-1 scheme. But would you consider this as final offseason deal Layman, top7 protected FRP for Cam Reddish?

KAT/Reid + Knight
Reddish/Vando/MCD
MCD/Prince/Okogie
Edwards/Beasley/Nowell
DLo/Beverly/Bolmaro + Wright

No thank you.

[Baseline81]

7-4-1 are the numbers of a little used reserve. Not a decent contributing starter. He has potential to become that.

Do you honestly believe McDaniels won't improve upon them?

[Klomp]

Because you can get that production give or take for far less commitment and keep some assets as well. It is not a vacuum.

Just because you can doesn't mean you will.

Trade assets are only truly assets if you take advantage of what they're worth. Holding onto them doesn't improve their value over time.

True and not true. True to the extent that inaction has an opportunity cost, but unture to the extent that the players you don’t trade have value and will continue to contribute to your team. Losing multiple good players for a single player is always risky. Beasley and MCD are starter level, losing both means Nowell or Beverly have to move into a starter role, and Okogie or JMAC get more minutes. But now what happens when Nowell gets hurt and you are very short on guards. I cannot stress enough how little money we have available after making a trade for Simmons and we would have multiple roster spots to fill. As we stand now we have moderate depth in every position, after trading for Simmons depending on who we send we are paper thin at between 1-3 positions. Worse still, Simmons ties your hands for years when it comes to rebuilding that depth. With big market teams stealing all the FAs and our draft capital tied up in Simmons (also if we succeed the picks become less likely to be impactful anyway,) we will be paper thin for years. Sometimes trade assets are in fact better left unused until a better value comes along.

Either we believe in the depth we've accumulated or we don't. One trade will not bring us all the way from moderate depth to being paper thin. It's also why it's important to be adding players who can contribute in multiple areas. If trading for Larry Nance for example, he's of no use in case of a guard injury. Ben Simmons, while we may view him as primarily as a PF, does have the skill set to help out in a pinch on the perimeter. It's also why adding guys who can carry a high usage is important. Simmons may not be elite in this area, but he has shown that he is capable whereas someone like a Beasley or Nowell might not be. When a star goes down, the other stars carry the load. We're talking about trading non-stars (who may be potential stars down the road, but that's not guaranteed).

I also think it's important to remember that this front office is very good at making moves on the fringes. Filling out the back of our depth for the future doesn't really worry me when we've got a front office who has turned late 1sts, 2nds and UDFAs into guys like Jaden McDaniels, Naz Reid, Leandro Bolmaro, Jaylen Nowell, etc. Filling out the back of the lineup card doesn't scare me. I also think it's important to remember that as of this moment we have three 2nd round picks due us this next draft. This is where those assets get replenished. We also still technically have the rights for both Jarred Vanderbilt and Jordan McLaughlin, even though they are not under contract yet.

[Klomp]

Frankly, you avoid bringing on a 4th or 5th option making $35mil who will have declining stats due to decreased role especially one who needed the ball in their hands to average 14/7/7, that becomes 12/7/5 pretty quick...or worse.

This is where I feel the biggest misjudgments come surrounding Simmons. Why do people think he needs the ball in his hands? Why do people think his role is decreasing? Why does that guarantee his stats will decline?

Last year was Simmons' least efficient season of his career, with a PER of 18.3. How many players have had seasons better than that in Minnesota?

2020-21: 1 (Towns)
2019-20: 1 (Towns)
2018-19: 3 (Towns, Butler, Rose)
2017-18: 2 (Towns, Butler)
2016-17: 1 (Towns)
2015-16: 1 (Towns)

He has never been the first or second scoring option in Philadelphia. We can debate as to whether he's even been the third option. So scoring opportunities really won't change that much. As I've highlighted prior, Simmons has averaged at least 7.0 rpg in every season of his career while playing alongside Embiid, who has grabbed double-digit rebounds per game each of the last four seasons. So playing next to a 7-footer in Towns won't affect much. Then we have the assists. I don't have the game footage to back this up, but especially last season most of the half-court sets were run through Embiid. It's not like Simmons is running iso sets or dribbling the air out of the ball while waiting for screeners. That's never been his game. He gets his assists in the flow of the offense, with a good chunk coming in transition. That wouldn't change.