- 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: NBA Offseason officially kicks off, Ingram’s days in NOLA coming to an end per Stein
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:38 am to Soggymoss
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:38 am to Soggymoss
quote:
Again, you’re having tunnel vision and not looking at other deals that can be made when you have 10+ tradeable firsts and a shitload of appealing tradeable salary.
We will have those assets regardless of what we do this offseason.
I'm not interested in making sure we are good in 4-5 years. We need to win now, or we are goign to be the team blowing it up in 3 years.
1
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:39 am to teke184
quote:
If Cleveland is holding off until the season, who does that leave as potential trade partners?
Atlanta and who else?
Philly, Orlando, Utah, ???
There's always wildcards that people don't think about before trades occur, especially if it expands to a 3 team trade.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:44 am to Soggymoss
quote:They are trying to package 2 worse picks to move up, not looking to move back.
If they’re so worthless why is Utah trying to acquire an additional pick in the 20’s?
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:46 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
I'm not interested in making sure we are good in 4-5 years. We need to win now,
I don’t understand you saying this when that trade literally sets you up for both of these. We would win the same or more games as we did last season with that roster, and have even more assets to make that trade for a superstar later if/when they become available.
They’re not currently available, and we cannot go into the season with BI, so the next best thing is to make sure you’re set up to win now and in the future AND have additional assets.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:47 am to Soggymoss
quote:
Again, you’re having tunnel vision and not looking at other deals that can be made when you have 10+ tradeable firsts and a shitload of appealing tradeable salary.
There will be a team out there that has traded away everything they have and has zero assets left that at the deadline will say frick it it’s not working we need to rebuild, whether thats Phoenix where Booker shakes loose, Nets where Bridges shakes loose, Philly where Embiid shakes loose, Clips where Kawhi shakes loose, Hawks where Trae shakes loose, someone is going to do it.
And what happens when we get outbid by OKC or Houston? Or what happens if the team moving the star player doesn’t want to do a full rebuild? Teams like the Nets, PHX, LAC don’t control their own future picks and aren’t normally looking to do a full reset and moving guys just for picks. Look at the last few true superstars to get traded. Having just expirings and picks doesn’t set us apart or make us more attractive trade partner.
*EDIT I think we are saying basically the same thing, but disagreeing on asset valuations and this part:
quote:
They’re not currently available, and we cannot go into the season with BI, so the next best thing is to make sure you’re set up to win now and in the future AND have additional assets.
I don’t think we HAVE to move BI, although it’s obviously preferable. I disagree that the trade you proposed sets us up to “win now and in the future”, I think it makes us worse.
This post was edited on 6/25/24 at 9:54 am
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:52 am to Soggymoss
quote:But for how many years have we had the assets to make a move and have not. Those players still have to want to come here if they demand out. I agree that if that is the only option other than giving BI $50 million + a year, we may have to settle. However, all of these proposals to get more assets to kick down the road as Zion gets older and his contract runs off makes no sense to me.
Again, you’re having tunnel vision and not looking at other deals that can be made when you have 10+ tradeable firsts and a shitload of appealing tradeable salary.
There will be a team out there that has traded away everything they have and has zero assets left that at the deadline will say frick it it’s not working we need to rebuild, whether thats Phoenix where Booker shakes loose, Nets where Bridges shakes loose, Philly where Embiid shakes loose, Clips where Kawhi shakes loose, Hawks where Trae shakes loose, someone is going to do it.
If the move is not available which is usually the case in the offseason, set yourself up to make the move.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:53 am to supe12sta12z
quote:The rumblings have been that Rich Paul wants Garland in the East if he gets traded.
I doubt Klutch will sit there quietly once Mitchell signs his extension. I'm sure they'll start to make a lot of noise to force Cleveland to move Garland.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:57 am to NOSHAU
quote:
The rumblings have been that Rich Paul wants Garland in the East if he gets traded.
Where does he end up if so?
Most options I am thinking of outside Orlando are either set at point or are so godawful Garland wouldn’t want to go there, like Washington.
Force him to Chicago for Lavine?
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:57 am to NOSHAU
quote:
The rumblings have been that Rich Paul wants Garland in the East if he gets traded.
Makes sense. Easier to make the all-star team and (although unlikely) an all-nba team
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:57 am to NOSHAU
quote:
The rumblings have been that Rich Paul wants Garland in the East if he gets traded
That may be true but I haven’ t seen that. Also a bit unrealistic as it would be the Cavs trading inter conference and leave very few teams looking for a PG. Magic, Heat, Nets basically as at all realistic. But maybe. I doubt they would shoot down a move to the Spurs.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:58 am to Baron
quote:
And what happens when we get outbid by OKC or Houston?
OKC has a bunch of protected picks that change to 2nds if not conveyed, or they’re from teams expected to be good for awhile like Dallas and Denver, so their picks are not actually as attractive as it may seem. Houston would be a threat because of their young guys, but they can’t compete with draft picks, they only have 4 tradeable future 1sts after this year.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 9:59 am to Soggymoss
quote:
, and have even more assets to make that trade for a superstar later if/when they become available.
None of the players you mentioned are assets. They are just salary fillers.
Trey is an asset.
Barnes/Collins/Huerter aren't assets.
and I get what you're saying, and I agree with you to an extent b/c I do think the Suns and Clippers are going to make big changes in the next year. I'd rather have BI with a new contract than Barnes/Collins/Huerter to use as assets. If you're goign to go this route, then you might as well send BI to Houston for young players instead, and i'd hate that just as much, but it would at least make more sense for what you are talking about.
quote:
We would win the same or more games as we did last season with that roster
I don't agree with that. We'd be worse. Y'all can hate BI all you want, but what he does is far greater than what the 3 role players you're getting back do, and CJ cannot take BI's place, nor can Trey. If we lose BI and don't get back a scorer/creator, we will be a worse team.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 10:01 am to Baron
Problem is that teams are set at point or complete arse water.
Celtics, Knicks, Cavs, Pacers, and Sixers are set at point.
Bucks and Heat don’t really have the assets to move and I don’t see Butler or Dames mixing well with Mitchell.
Rest of the east is Chicago, Atlanta, Brooklyn, Toronto, Charlotte, Washington, and Detroit.
Brooklyn is in win now mode cause they don’t have shite but the rest of those are in the process of rebuilding or starting a rebuild.
Celtics, Knicks, Cavs, Pacers, and Sixers are set at point.
Bucks and Heat don’t really have the assets to move and I don’t see Butler or Dames mixing well with Mitchell.
Rest of the east is Chicago, Atlanta, Brooklyn, Toronto, Charlotte, Washington, and Detroit.
Brooklyn is in win now mode cause they don’t have shite but the rest of those are in the process of rebuilding or starting a rebuild.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 10:03 am to teke184
Oh I’m not saying he’s going to get his wish, just that it makes sense for him to want his client to stay in the East
Posted on 6/25/24 at 10:03 am to NOSHAU
quote:
But for how many years have we had the assets to make a move and have not
That’s why I said in a previous post we would have to stop being a pussy and actually make the deal. Getting players that Griff wouldn’t consider stars or is not emotionally attached to would open that up more.
quote:
Those players still have to want to come here if they demand out.
Not necessarily, if they have a year or two left on their contract then you make the trade like Indiana did with Siakam and hope you can convince them to re-sign.
quote:
However, all of these proposals to get more assets to kick down the road as Zion gets older and his contract runs off makes no sense to me.
I believe that team would be better and deeper than the team we put on the court last season. Kessler>=Jonas, Starter Trey>BI in our starting lineup as shown last season. Collins>Nance so we get better at the backup 5 spot, and Barnes/Huerter replace Trey’s scoring on the bench. I can’t fathom how that is a worse team.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 10:11 am to Soggymoss
quote:
OKC has a bunch of protected picks that change to 2nds if not conveyed, or they’re from teams expected to be good for awhile like Dallas and Denver, so their picks are not actually as attractive as it may seem. Houston would be a threat because of their young guys, but they can’t compete with draft picks, they only have 4 tradeable future 1sts after this year.
Okay what about Utah, the Spurs, or the Nets with the PHX future picks/swaps? You’re missing the point. The point is we wouldn’t the only team with draft capital that would want a star. If we have 12 future firsts rather than 10, does that even matter? I would rather keep a mix of young talent and picks.
I will say that all this is moot if we resign BI to a max or close to it. If that is the other option, than I completely agree with you
Posted on 6/25/24 at 10:21 am to Baron
quote:
I will say that all this is moot if we resign BI to a max or close to it. If that is the other option, than I completely agree with you
And that’s exactly what I’ve been saying, this trade would be because nothing else is available and we not going into the season with BI, and we also don’t take a step back which I think would be the biggest factor in Griff’s head
This post was edited on 6/25/24 at 10:28 am
Posted on 6/25/24 at 10:24 am to PELsu
quote:It was discussed on NBA Today. Also there is some discussion in this article as well -
That may be true but I haven’ t seen that. Also a bit unrealistic as it would be the Cavs trading inter conference and leave very few teams looking for a PG. Magic, Heat, Nets basically as at all realistic. But maybe. I doubt they would shoot down a move to the Spurs.
LINK
quote:
NBA sources shared with Right Down Euclid that the preference would be for Garland to be moved to an Eastern Conference team that can maximize Garland’s on-court opportunities. It would be a cleaner, easier path for Garland to earn All-Star appearances and possible All-NBA honors, especially if he’s leading an offense independently rather than sharing responsibilities with Mitchell.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 10:27 am to Soggymoss
quote:
We would win the same or more games as we did last season with that roster, and have even more assets to make that trade for a superstar later if/when they become available.
False. That roster you put together is going to struggle to make the playoffs. If Zion gets hurt, that roster is fricking toast. There's no more BI to carry you for those 20 games Zion is going to miss.
Posted on 6/25/24 at 10:34 am to Jester
quote:
. If Zion gets hurt, that roster is fricking toast. There's no more BI to carry you for those 20 games Zion is going to miss.
it's no differnt when Zion goes to the bench.
If Zion went down for 20 games that roster would win maybe 6 games
Page 25 of 185
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News