re: Any possible way we can make a move for Steven Adams?

quote:

---

Trading for him now, though, means that we only have to overpay him for this upcoming season, and we were able to extend him for two years at a reasonable contract, which makes overpaying him for this season more palatable.

---

Who else was knocking down the doors to give up a future first and commit 17.5 million a year to bring in Adams?

I’ll hang up and listen.

Soggmoss is the only guy who liked the deal

I get it's not the same deal but it is funny everyone else shite on it

quote:

---

The idea that you overpaid is silly because there were outlets that said we were interested last summer as well and ended up with Favors.

---

And we all know how Favors turned out. People talking about the money too much not looking at what the money goes towards on the court. I'd rather pay for someone that shows up and balls and buys in to the team than go to the bargain bin for someone that just brings the team down more than not.

This was a pretty good bump. No need for anyone to get butthurt.

Adams has a contract of homegrown role player on a contender...that broke up 5 years ago.

Still one of my favorites in the league and I’ll enjoy his 1.5 seasons here.

At least we don’t have to “ride with Hayes” at the start of next season.

quote:

---

The only other team that even gave Brees a chance was the Dolphins and even they eventually turned their nose. I get this isn't an injury situation like that was, but my point is just because other teams aren't clamoring for it doesn't automatically mean its a bad move. I've been watching Adams for years, he's a beast. If you don't think Adams is worth 17.5 and a pick, especially after Favors literally cost us games then thats on you but I disagree.

---

You’re right, that’s not an apt comparison.

Brees was a very good QB beset by injury.

Adams is a center that was unable to play meaningful minutes in his last two playoff series due to being exposed and exploited. Billy Donovan(a coach many on here thought would be an ideal hire) literally couldn’t play him in the fourth quarter of their Portland series and he was getting run in circles by PJ fricking Tucker. So you claim to watch him yet you have nothing to add about what has been the catalyst for why OKC has attempted to move him for two seasons until Griffin decided to pay for the privilege?

quote:

---

- 29.5 mil salary- irrelevant
- Hill- negative asset
- A late protected 1st- role player
- 2 very good seconds- fringe players
- Zylan, Kenny and Josh-fringe players
- Miller- negative asset

---

Again the salary is irrelevant since we had that on the books anyway with Jrue and those other guys (you are leaving out the fact that we also got to dump Miller's contract).

Hill was ALWAYS going to be a flip piece. Why would we want to keep a 34 year old PG with $10 mil in salary? We already had Ball and Naw, plus Ingram and Zion to handle the ball in addition to targeting Bledsoe.

The late protected first has decent value, but how many guys outside the lottery, much less outside the top 4, become great players? You are looking at likely a role player. While that's not nothing, Adams is far more than just a role player.

And those 2 2nds may have great value for 2nds, but 2nds do NOT have much value at all. They are throw away picks, especially when you consider all the 1sts we have. Where would you fit those guys if you drafted them? And if you are complaining because we could have used them in a trade, well we did just that.

The 3 youngsters you can argue, but odds aren't good that they'll be anything more than role players at best, but more likely bottom of the roster fodder and career G league players.

The only thing we gave up with any kind of remote value to us was that lottery protected 1st. Salary is irrelevant, Hill is irrelevant (which again you complain about a very good starting center's salary, but not about the 34 year old backup PG's, nor the fact that we cleared Miller's), 2nds are irrelevant, and those 3 young players are irrelevant.

Everyone who's complaining is just doing so because they saw the first trade, which wasn't a finished product, and compared it to the 2nd and freaked because of the number of pieces we gave up, while not actually considering the value of those pieces.

Most of those pieces are near worthless to us. 2 of them (Hill and Miller) were negative assets we got to clear.

In short, going by odds we gave up:
1 role player
5 fringe players
2 negative assets

We got:
1 starting center for 3 years

If that isn't plus value in our favor, I don't know what is.

I didn't expect to use any of those picks, but they definitely all have value in a trade or trades for star players, along with other assets.

Plus OKC have been trying throw Adams away for 18 months. They were running out of time or lose him for nothing. We had the leverage but didn't use it

What negative assets did we dump?

lol

Hill is very much a positive asset (lead the league in 3pt% and a good defender) and Miller's contract was specifically designed to be trade filler. It wasn't even guaranteed this year

Try again chief