- 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: KOC: Pels have received multiple offers including 2 1sts for Trey, standing firm on 3 plus
Posted on 6/29/26 at 1:24 pm to TeddyPadillac
Posted on 6/29/26 at 1:24 pm to TeddyPadillac
quote:
We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't think he's a winning player. His defense sucks, he's too hard to build around, and his clutch play is more often than not, terrible.
The problem here is viewing Zion as a non winning player and somehow acting like the other 10 people are indeed winning players. Its not a "choose Zion or Trey" its "take whatever players we have and turn them into winning players".
quote:
Then why did we give up what we did to get Queen? This is the part that doesn't make sense. They are basically saying Zion and Queen can't co-exist. Well if that's the case, then trade one of them.
Why does acquiring Queen and keeping Zion have to be linear? We very well could have loved Queen so much that we wanted him for the future. We simultaneously may not have been offered shite for a Zion trade and know its currently better to have a possibly 20ppg option than to not.
You don't just do things to do them. It actually makes me feel better that we got Queen and still have Zion because it means that we aren't going to trade our assets for low value just to do it and it also confirms that we aren't targeting players specifically for Zion.
It may look "bad" but its actually for very good reasons. Its not Dumars fault that Zion happened to still be on the roster and has low value. There are certain things we have to simply work with that the current FO were dealt with and didn't exactly cause.
This post was edited on 6/29/26 at 1:25 pm
2
Posted on 6/29/26 at 1:39 pm to Dantheman504
There seems to be a general consensus that we aren't capable of moving on from building around Zion while he is on the roster. This also makes no sense because he's barely played in several years, we are making moves regardless of him, and he came off the bench at times last year + sat for players who had the hot hand.
Its crazy how y'all view him like such a small asset but then exaggerate the existence of the whole team based on him. He's worth so little that if we have 14 other competent players its his fault we are failing?
Y'all do know teams can have a large worthless asset and still find success in other places right?
The reality is that I'm not sure Trey/ Herb aregoing to have the ceiling we originally wanted and that's why we are open to trading them while their value is high. Zion/ Murray have not reached their ceiling here and have low value. This is a situation Dumars was dealt, now they have to figure out the best plan of action.
The plan of action is to put the best people around Queen/ Fears with the best value per value transaction possible.
Its crazy how y'all view him like such a small asset but then exaggerate the existence of the whole team based on him. He's worth so little that if we have 14 other competent players its his fault we are failing?
Y'all do know teams can have a large worthless asset and still find success in other places right?
The reality is that I'm not sure Trey/ Herb aregoing to have the ceiling we originally wanted and that's why we are open to trading them while their value is high. Zion/ Murray have not reached their ceiling here and have low value. This is a situation Dumars was dealt, now they have to figure out the best plan of action.
The plan of action is to put the best people around Queen/ Fears with the best value per value transaction possible.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 1:54 pm to Dantheman504
quote:
The problem here is viewing Zion as a non winning player and somehow acting like the other 10 people are indeed winning players.
Why?
Zion is not a winning player. We've got 7 years worth of data to tell us this.
Trey and Zion are not the same type of player. Trey is a role player. Zion is supposed to be a #1 type guy, and he's just not. Trey can't play that role. Just b/c Trey isn't a #1 guy doesn't mean he isn't a winning player.
quote:
Why does acquiring Queen and keeping Zion have to be linear? We very well could have loved Queen so much that we wanted him for the future.
Well, this is the future. I've seen enough of Zion. Wy would you give up what you did to draft Queen if you didn't have thoughts of him replacing Zion at the 4?
quote:
We simultaneously may not have been offered shite for a Zion trade and know its currently better to have a possibly 20ppg option than to not.
You don't just do things to do them.
Sometimes you do.
I would say giving up assets to unload Poole would be something you don't just do to do.
Giving up on Zion is something i would do just to do at this point. Nothign about this team will ever change until he's gone, and his value isn't going to improve. So unless we are just going to keep running it back basically, then go ahead and keep Zion and keep being a losing franchise, or peel the bandaid off and let's move forward.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:01 pm to TeddyPadillac
quote:
Wy would you give up what you did to draft Queen if you didn't have thoughts of him replacing Zion at the 4?
Who said we didn't?
Dumars liked Queen/ Fears and sees a future with them. You are blaming Dumars for Zion already being on the roster when he took over. Its year 1, we just haven't gottent that far yet. Err body needs to take a damn breathe. You are assuming we don't plan to replace Zion solely based off the fact that he's still on the roster.
quote:
Trey and Zion are not the same type of player. Trey is a role player. Zion is supposed to be a #1 type guy
Yes. This is why you trade the role player with high value and keep the #1 type guy who has low value and underperformed.
quote:
I would say giving up assets to unload Poole would be something you don't just do to do.
Giving up on Zion is something i would do just to do at this point
I have no comment if you would actually prefer to keep Jordan Poole @34mil > Zion @44mil.
At that point you get thrown into the "Zion PTSD" group of fans that choose hatred > common sense.
This post was edited on 6/29/26 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:21 pm to Dantheman504
quote:
Yes. This is why you trade the role player with high value and keep the #1 type guy who has low value and underperformed.
I just disagree. It's ok.
quote:
I have no comment if you would actually prefer to keep Jordan Poole @34mil > Zion @44mil.
I did not say that in any way, or insinuate that.
I'm simply stating that i'm not interested in giving up assets just to dump Poole. I think that would be stupid. I'd prefer we bought him out if we can't use him in a trade for an allstar level player. You said "don't just do something to do something". I'm agreeing with my take on not using assets to dump Poole.
I don't want to send out assets right now. I think that is just dumb, unless it means we are getting back players that allow us to compete at a high level right now, which i find hard to see that path being attainable with Zion on the roster b/c of how difficult it is to build a competent team around him defensively and as a 3 point shooting offense.
My point is that i'm ready to cut bait with Zion b/c i don't think this team can move forward while he's still on the roster. So if we don't get the return we want for him, so be it, we're simply better off without him on the roster than with him on it, regardless of the return we get for him. When Zion is in the game it changes how everyone plays around him, which is why i say we can't move forward in a new direction until he's gone. But it seems clear we aren't looking to go in a new direction just yet.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:55 pm to whatiknowsofar
quote:
Some folks been underselling trey like crazy
I think Trey is a difficult player to evaluate in terms of value. On paper he looks really good. The height, the length, the shooting. And he’s carried the label as a long, athletic wing. But then you watch him play and he seems very one dimensional offensively and not great defensively. I think for the Pels it’s probably best to trade him at his highest potential trade value which is now. 3 firsts and it’s a no brainer for me. If no one will give 3 then I probably still take 2 firsts. The Pels have to do something. Running it back with basically the same roster will be brutal.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 3:55 pm to ScoopAndScore
I would like to keep Trey, his game should age well. He will take pressure off Fears and DQ. He is a solid #3 option.
But and it is a big Ole Butt...he has been injured a good bit the last 3 seasons missing about 30% of the games. 57, 53 ,66
Bc of his injury history i would be listening.
But and it is a big Ole Butt...he has been injured a good bit the last 3 seasons missing about 30% of the games. 57, 53 ,66
Bc of his injury history i would be listening.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News