- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Apparently the Pels are trying to trade Jordan Hawkins
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:00 pm to Soggymoss
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:00 pm to Soggymoss
quote:
Which the Clippers would immediately match, then we would have to give up a 1st to get them to not match.
or you could simply say no and if they want to match it then let them, which is what we should have done with DG.
I'm sure all it would take is some 2nd's, not a 1st, and assuming the Kawhi trade goes through I don't think they really want to keep Mathurin.
The Nuggets may be exploring a Cam Johnson trade to shed money so they can resign Peyton Watson, who wants a 5/$125M deal.
I'd consider swapping out Herb for Cam, and would without a doubt do a S&T with Herb going out for Watson.
Dumping Hawkins somewhere does give you enough room to send out Herb for Cam or for a $23M Watson, and that keeps the Nuggets out the 1st apron.
I think the Nuggets would love to get Herb.
0
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:04 pm to Dantheman504
quote:
Team has regressed and given itself little room for error.
Or room for improvement depending on the trade... At a minimum we are expecting to bring someone back that will have a bigger impact than Hawk. That's the opposite of regressing.
But yes if you assume we signed Hawk for no reason, attach assets for no reason, and bring absolutely no one back then I'd agree. But that hasn't happwned and doesn't make sense.
This post was edited on 7/23/26 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:10 pm to Dantheman504
It also makes zero sense that anyone, much less Memphis, is going to give us an asset to take a one year rental on a lottery disappointment. If you want to say he will be used as salary in a starting center trade then I could believe it. Stein is not reporting that though. The way it is reported it sounds as though we will give up an asset to get off of him.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:12 pm to Dantheman504
Even the Hawk vs Kira argument is a little much.
Kira career highs:
21 pts
16 pts
16 pts
15 pts
14 pts
14 pts
13 pts
13 pts
13pts
13pts
Hawk:
34pts
31pts
25pts
25pts
25pts
25pts
25pts
24pts
24pts
23pts
Hawk has (13) games with more points than Kira's career high. And we were in the tax/ forced to move Kira.
Kira career highs:
21 pts
16 pts
16 pts
15 pts
14 pts
14 pts
13 pts
13 pts
13pts
13pts
Hawk:
34pts
31pts
25pts
25pts
25pts
25pts
25pts
24pts
24pts
23pts
Hawk has (13) games with more points than Kira's career high. And we were in the tax/ forced to move Kira.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:15 pm to ThePistol
quote:
The way it is reported it sounds as though we will give up an asset to get off of him.
Yeah got it, but we don't have to. The only reason we do that is for a specific reason. For example if we trade Hawk to get Mathurin then the Mathurin trade is already agreed upon. Otherwise there's no reason to give up an asset.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:29 pm to Dantheman504
I agree. Normally, I would give them the benefit of the doubt, but this front office hasn’t earned it. I won’t lose my mind on this reporting but competence can’t be assumed at this point.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 1:20 pm to Dantheman504
quote:
You think we guaranteed his deal so that we can give up a pick to get rid of him?
"Dumars-ing"
Posted on 7/23/26 at 1:24 pm to jrobic4
A big part of winning in the NBA is playing guys that don’t suck. Hawkins actively hurts your team. Terrible on defense, takes a ton of shots and misses the large majority of them. Picking up his option was asinine and I and many others said the same that very day.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 1:41 pm to PELsu
quote:
Picking up his option was asinine and I and many others said the same that very day.
Yes I was one of these people. I also explained how if we target a player for $40-$50mil we wouldn't have choice to include Hawk with Poole or others.
There's scenarios where not having Hawk forces us to trade Herb or someone else to land a specific player.
There's 2 different definitions for "asset". A 2nd rd pick is an asset as in its something you have or acquire. It does not mean a 2nd is an asset meaning worth a shite under any capacity at all.
This post was edited on 7/23/26 at 1:45 pm
Posted on 7/23/26 at 1:50 pm to Dantheman504
Turner and Kuzma for Poole and Hawkins, with Hawkins going to a third team saves Milwaukee $13 million immediately and gets them out of the rest of Turners contract. Plus opens a roster spot. Becomes slightly more appealing for them not having to take another guard.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 1:59 pm to Dantheman504
I think what you're failing or ignoring to realize...no one wants Poole either.
He's a bad contract, even as an expiring...you are overvaluing your own assets.
We would have to give up more to get off Poole and Hawk, assuming anyone is truly willing to listen. I get the theory in your head and it's not wrong but it's also not the reality.
I think in order to get off both in one deal you have to give up Herb...otherwise, there are no takers...at least not now. Deadline? Maybe, but even then unlikely.
He's a bad contract, even as an expiring...you are overvaluing your own assets.
We would have to give up more to get off Poole and Hawk, assuming anyone is truly willing to listen. I get the theory in your head and it's not wrong but it's also not the reality.
I think in order to get off both in one deal you have to give up Herb...otherwise, there are no takers...at least not now. Deadline? Maybe, but even then unlikely.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 2:06 pm to PELsu
quote:
Picking up his option was asinine and I and many others said the same that very day.
Y'all are correct.
Pelicans Exercise Hawkins Option
quote:
Balsamic_duck
quote:
Can’t wait to burn more 2nds to dump Hawkins.
I still don't think it was a big deal to do after year 2, but i am obviously in the minority on that one.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 2:12 pm to TeddyPadillac
Haha, thanks. Was looking for that thread. Good to see I got the first post in calling out this front office.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 2:16 pm to PELsu
quote:
Turner and Kuzma for Poole and Hawkins, with Hawkins going to a third team saves Milwaukee $13 million immediately and gets them out of the rest of Turners contract. Plus opens a roster spot. Becomes slightly more appealing for them not having to take another guard.
This is best case scenario if we "run it back".
Posted on 7/23/26 at 2:20 pm to BallHawk
quote:
I think what you're failing or ignoring to realize...no one wants Poole either.
He's a bad contract, even as an expiring...you are overvaluing your own assets
I am not overvlauing either of Poole/ Hawk. Their value is both 0 and $50mil.
quote:
We would have to give up more to get off Poole and Hawk, assuming anyone is truly willing to listen. I get the theory in your head and it's not wrong but it's also not the reality.
Uhh this is exactly how trades work. Usually teams trade people they don't want attached with assets the other teams do want in order to get a player the other team wants....
That's exactly what I'm saying. You give up Poole/ Hawk and 1-2 1sts instead of players like Herb.
The advantage of having Poole/ Hawk is specifically to attach picks and get an asset while NOT trading the actual players you want to keep.
Example:
Detroit wants (4) 1st and bench player for Duren and no team offers them more than just 4 1sts.. We offer Poole + (5) 1st. They aren't not taking the deal because of Poole, they take it because they got the assets they wanted. Poole is irrelevant, its just a salary match.
Yes we would have to give up more to get a player trading Poole instead of Trey Murphy. That is the reality I'm talking about.
Majority of trades end up with a player on a roster that team doesn't want. Trades are about the assets to acquire the main player being traded, everything else is filler.
This post was edited on 7/23/26 at 2:36 pm
Posted on 7/23/26 at 2:43 pm to Dantheman504
Here are a few different scenarios for the type of moves we could make with several asset packages.
MIL: Poole/ Hawk/ '28 1st/ '30 2nd
Pels: M Turner/ Kuzma
MIL: Poole/ Hawk/ J Walker '27 IND/ '30 2nd
IND: Herb
Pels: M Turner/ Kuzma/ B Shepherd/ '29 IND
Nets: Poole/ Hawk/ '28 1st/ '30 1st
Pels: MPJ
DET: Trey/ '28/ '30
Pels: Duren
DET: Zion/ '28/ '30
Pels: Duren
IND: Herb
DET: '27 IND/ '28 Pels/ '29 IND/ '30 Pels/ '32 Pels/ Poole/ Hawk
Pels: Duren/ J Walker/ B Shepherd
You can give extra assets with Poole/ Hawk and keep Herb, Trey, Zion. You can trade just Herb to get us over that edge and have more assets to make a move. Or you can send a higher valued asset and reduce the amount of picks you send.
MIL: Poole/ Hawk/ '28 1st/ '30 2nd
Pels: M Turner/ Kuzma
MIL: Poole/ Hawk/ J Walker '27 IND/ '30 2nd
IND: Herb
Pels: M Turner/ Kuzma/ B Shepherd/ '29 IND
Nets: Poole/ Hawk/ '28 1st/ '30 1st
Pels: MPJ
DET: Trey/ '28/ '30
Pels: Duren
DET: Zion/ '28/ '30
Pels: Duren
IND: Herb
DET: '27 IND/ '28 Pels/ '29 IND/ '30 Pels/ '32 Pels/ Poole/ Hawk
Pels: Duren/ J Walker/ B Shepherd
You can give extra assets with Poole/ Hawk and keep Herb, Trey, Zion. You can trade just Herb to get us over that edge and have more assets to make a move. Or you can send a higher valued asset and reduce the amount of picks you send.
This post was edited on 7/23/26 at 3:34 pm
Posted on 7/23/26 at 3:14 pm to Dantheman504
I have no desire to bring Kuzma to this team for free, much less give up assets to get him. He's a chucklehead and he's been arse the last 2 years.
I also have no desire to bring in Myles Turner as well with his 3 years left on his contract. I know he's only 30, but he seems like he's older. I know he shoots the 3, and has done so well the last 2 years, but i just don't think what he does helps his teams win.
I mean the dude is 6'11" 250 with a 7'4" wingspan and Trey rebounded better than him this past year. He's one of the worst rebounding bigs in the game.
On top of that most of the defensive stats that i posted for DQ were better than Turner.
I also have no desire to bring in Myles Turner as well with his 3 years left on his contract. I know he's only 30, but he seems like he's older. I know he shoots the 3, and has done so well the last 2 years, but i just don't think what he does helps his teams win.
I mean the dude is 6'11" 250 with a 7'4" wingspan and Trey rebounded better than him this past year. He's one of the worst rebounding bigs in the game.
On top of that most of the defensive stats that i posted for DQ were better than Turner.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 3:39 pm to TeddyPadillac
Turner had a terrible year last year but this is 1 season from being the Center for a championship contending team (he didn't look amazing in that championship). But its definitely an improvement to the team. Rebounding is rough but he is still a very good defensive center.
He was 4th in shot block % behind Wemby/ Chet/ J Huff and right infront of Clingan/ Mobley/ Gobert. Throw in spacing + 3pt shooting and I think he makes a pretty big impact.
I don't hate the Turner move if you give up a 1st because the reality is that it either makes us better or we just blow it up and recoop the 1st we lost.
Adding Kuzma makes sense if we do lose someone like Herb. If you trade Herb/ Trey to make an upgrade then adding Kuzma into rotation would be helpful.
He was 4th in shot block % behind Wemby/ Chet/ J Huff and right infront of Clingan/ Mobley/ Gobert. Throw in spacing + 3pt shooting and I think he makes a pretty big impact.
I don't hate the Turner move if you give up a 1st because the reality is that it either makes us better or we just blow it up and recoop the 1st we lost.
Adding Kuzma makes sense if we do lose someone like Herb. If you trade Herb/ Trey to make an upgrade then adding Kuzma into rotation would be helpful.
This post was edited on 7/23/26 at 3:41 pm
Posted on 7/23/26 at 4:42 pm to Fun Bunch
Wonder how many unprotected 1sts we'll throw in the deal.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 5:06 pm to Dantheman504
quote:
Turner had a terrible year last year but this is 1 season from being the Center for a championship contending team (he didn't look amazing in that championship). But its definitely an improvement to the team. Rebounding is rough but he is still a very good defensive center.
He's been good at defending the pick and roll, which obviously is very important in todays game, but he's a lazy basketball player, which is evident by his lack of rebounding. The reason he did well with the PnR is b/c of his athleticism, and that is starting to fade away as he ages.
quote:
e was 4th in shot block % behind Wemby/ Chet/ J Huff and right infront of Clingan/ Mobley/ Gobert
Correct, when he wants to try, he's pretty good.
He's bottom half of the league in isolation defense at .95PPP, while DQ was top 1/3 in the league at .86PPP
PnR defense was 1.21PPP, while DQ was 1.17PPP
He gave up 64% shooting within 5', and it was 62% the year before. DQ is at 65%
He gave up 48% shooting overall this past year, the same as DQ.
If we are going to call Turner a good defensive 5, then you might as well call DQ one too.
I know Turner can be a good player. The problem is he's only good when he feels like it, and as he ages that feels like it is becoming less and less common.
Look at last year during their run. Regular season he as 1.11 PPP in the PnR. Gets to the playoffs and he's an awesome 0.73PPP.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News