Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:52 pm
by jazanetti
City of Trees wrote:
jazanetti wrote:
City of Trees wrote:Almost guarantees one Ntilikina/DSJ/Monk fall to to 10. I saw Ntilikina's Euro coach is joining the Mavs summer league coaching staff. I wonder if the Mavs big board has him rated higher than DSJ?
Apart Fultz, I think Monk is the man that fits them perfectly.
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:00 pm
by SactownHrtBrks8
I cannot wait for Thursday. I do not see the Knicks trading Porzingis. I can understand them being mad about him skipping his exit meeting, but it is just smoke. You just don't trade a guy that talented. At least not yet. I would take Lauri M at 10 if he is available. I am beginning to see the appeal of him as I dig more in. Let Skal and him fight it out as the Future PF.
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:14 pm
by blind prophet
City of Trees wrote:If you can turn Cousins into Porzingis and Buddy you take it 10/10 times
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:15 pm
by blind prophet
SactownHrtBrks8 wrote:I cannot wait for Thursday. I do not see the Knicks trading Porzingis. I can understand them being mad about him skipping his exit meeting, but it is just smoke. You just don't trade a guy that talented. At least not yet. I would take Lauri M at 10 if he is available. I am beginning to see the available of him as I dig more in. Let Skal and him fight it out as the Future PF.
I think with the athleticism of Skal & WCS you may be able to get away with playing all 3 at the same time on occasion.
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:17 pm
by JohnWillow
City of Trees wrote:If you can turn Cousins into Porzingis and Buddy you take it 10/10 times
If You can give them 5th +10th for him you take it and run. I don't care Porzingis is a franchise player, Buddy + Porzingis at center + Skal at point guard is a future core, just somehow draft Frank Mason in the 2nd round and i'm excited.
Re: RE: Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:30 pm
by City of Trees
blind prophet wrote:
City of Trees wrote:If you can turn Cousins into Porzingis and Buddy you take it 10/10 times
Yup, 4 more wins and the pick would've been Chicago's. No doubt in my mind if we had Cousins still we would win at least 4 more and probably end up at 12 or 13.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:17 pm
by City of Trees
codydaze wrote:
City of Trees wrote:
blind prophet wrote: Well it would be Cuz & our first round pick.
You have to factor in Kings likely don't own 5 if they held onto Cousins. One could argue the pick would be in Chicago
Yup, 4 more wins and the pick would've been Chicago's. No doubt in my mind if we had Cousins still we would win at least 4 more and probably end up at 12 or 13.
Yep. If the Kings had Cousins we would have no picks this year.
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:02 pm
by Christine-In-AZ
Spoiler:
KF10 wrote:dozencousins -- here is what I will say about this:
Anyone who is connected and have sources will receive some sort of criticism and hate in return. Reporters with sources will face scrutiny no matter if it is deserved or not. In this day and age, these reporters have the ability to block people on twitter (example), poke fun or simply ignore the naysayers. It comes with the territory. In your case, it is your right to share your information publicly or keep it to yourself. Lets say you share information and it doesn't pan out, you have to expect some people questioning you. If you can't handle it, don't report info from a source.
For you all:
In this case, I simply can't stress enough about the ignore function that we have here in RealGM. In this case, it only takes one party to utilize this function and this whole derailment can be terminated.[/b]
I thought RealGM had a vetting policy when it comes to a poster claiming such information? Something that puts the onus on the poster to provide some degree of proof that they have a connection to possible inside FO info. Could never be fool-proof, but at least it would filter out people that are just pulling stuff out of their *ss and publishing it as fact, in order to satisfy some psychological need or short coming. If someone claims they are getting "inside" straight from a team employee (not reporter hearsay) it would not be that difficult to at least verify that they know someone "inside". Just knowing someone that works for a team doesn't mean you get true intel, but at least they've proven one threshold towards gathering it.
There would be many vetting options and none would be perfect, but at least there's some evidence that they aren't just making stuff up. And if they don't accept the vetting or fail it, they are prohibited from posting info that is presented as "inside information". That's how I thought RGM wants it.
Sagan said it- "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" ...and in this situation RGM is only requiring just a tiny bit of evidence.
Sooo anywaaaay...
If come Thursday Ball goes to the Lakers, the Suns surprise and take Fox, Kings pass on a PG at #5, Smith is taken by NYK and the Mavs grab Ntilikina at #9...
...would any of you be interested in Bledsoe for #10 & (for $$ matching) Afflalo? IDK just a thought
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:16 pm
by City of Trees
D'Lo and Mozgov for Lopez and #27. Wow! Nets big win!
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:18 pm
by Eisenheart
omg how stupid is Magic?! i like
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:21 pm
by KF10
Spoiler:
ChrisInAZ wrote:
KF10 wrote:dozencousins -- here is what I will say about this:
Anyone who is connected and have sources will receive some sort of criticism and hate in return. Reporters with sources will face scrutiny no matter if it is deserved or not. In this day and age, these reporters have the ability to block people on twitter (example), poke fun or simply ignore the naysayers. It comes with the territory. In your case, it is your right to share your information publicly or keep it to yourself. Lets say you share information and it doesn't pan out, you have to expect some people questioning you. If you can't handle it, don't report info from a source.
For you all:
In this case, I simply can't stress enough about the ignore function that we have here in RealGM. In this case, it only takes one party to utilize this function and this whole derailment can be terminated.[/b][/color]
I thought RealGM had a vetting policy when it comes to a poster claiming such information? Something that puts the onus on the poster to provide some degree of proof that they have a connection to possible inside FO info. Could never be fool-proof, but at least it would filter out people that are just pulling stuff out of their *ss and publishing it as fact, in order to satisfy some psychological need or short coming. If someone claims they are getting "inside" straight from a team employee (not reporter hearsay) it would not be that difficult to at least verify that they know someone "inside". Just knowing someone that works for a team doesn't mean you get true intel, but at least they've proven one threshold towards gathering it.
There would be many vetting options and none would be perfect, but at least there's some evidence that they aren't just making stuff up. And if they don't accept the vetting or fail it, they are prohibited from posting info that is presented as "inside information". That's how I thought RGM wants it.
Sagan said it- "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" ...and in this situation RGM is only requiring just a tiny bit of evidence.
Spoiler:
I don't believe there is a vetting procedure/policy in place when it comes to posters claiming to have "inside information" on x team. I disagree about on "...it would not be that difficult to at least verify that they know someone "inside"" I would think that would be the hardest part to prove. What if the source doesn't want to be identified? You can't force them to write something or record their voice (not limited to these examples of course).
If anything, to be considered a credible source of information and reliable -- the information that was set forth by a poster should be legit. It would definitely help to post something concrete before anything official happens. That way, the members of this board would start to believe the person with the information. In my opinion, in dozencousins' case, he is hit or miss. Assuming he has a legit source to go to, the information relayed to him is either reliable or not. If it is reliable, its typically information that is already known, was made public or can be made if you put 2 + 2 together. That is what I've seen so far.
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:25 pm
by KF10
City of Trees wrote:D'Lo and Mozgov for Lopez and #27. Wow! Nets big win!
Lopez is a huge upgrade over Mozgov in both contract and talent. But D'Lo for #27 is a massive advantage for the Nets.
I dont have any historical data but at the moment I feel first time GM's need a leash in their first offseason. Vlade amd Magic both pulled off some stupid trades.
I think the value is pretty even. Brook's 22mil comes off the book this year for LA plus they can replace Dlo's roster spot with a decent rookie(if they pick right).
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:32 pm
by KF10
So, I guess cap space is still a huge commodity around the league, huh?
I hope the Kings partake in such transactions where they eat a bad contract(s) in return for valuable assets.
Re: NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:34 pm
by benchmobbin02
KF10 wrote:So, I guess cap space is still a huge commodity around the league, huh?
I hope the Kings partake in such transactions where they eat a bad contract(s) in return for valuable assets.
i like