re: When do we start having the conversation about trading Zion?

quote:

---

as for the starter and 2 1s and a swap that's a fair deal for the buyer getting a coin flip if zion plays 60 games any season the seasons he's under current deal.

---

You'd rather trade a generational talent with a 50/50 chance of being healthy for a starter and couple of 1sts to add to our very bad team?


The coin toss is easily the much, much better option in your scenario. In 1, your team is toast, done. In the other, you have a 50/50 shot at success.

quote:

---

I feel like you are discounting the word starter.

---

What do you mean by that? I hope you're not suggesting a really good starter.

quote:

---

He will never have a full, healthy season.....

---

You mean another full, healthy season?

quote:

---

with a 50/50 chance

---

Where are you pulling that %?

What we should be doing is fixing all of the non Zion issues, and doing everything we can to ensure Zion stays healthy. The fact that Zion can’t miss a game without the team losing 13 in a row should be the glaring and obvious issue. The fact that we allowed Zion to rush back right before the all star break with a hamstring issue should be grounds for heads to roll. We have coaching issues, no PG, limited shooting and quality bigs. There isn’t a backup PF on the roster.

We’re relying so much on Zion to carry us, I’m surprised he doesn’t have back issues as well.

I’m as frustrated as anyone about Zion not playing, I get it. But only an idiot would intentionally trade away Zion freaking Williamson.

quote:

---

It's not like you're getting to pay him 25% of his salary.

---

But it beats paying the same salry to other guys where you absolutely know you won't be very good and have no hope. So paying a guy for the 25% chance is better IMO.

quote:

---

As a fan I'd rather be a good team (which you would most likely be given the assets you'd get)

---

How? We are not a good team without Zion. If we're being honest with ourselves, we are closer to a bottom 5 team than just an average team without Zion. The last 2 years worth of sample size tells us that.

If Zion has enough value to add enough dudes to turn us from a shite team to a good team, then he has enough value to do that for our team too.

quote:

---

without a chance of making the finals each year than one year maybe being good enough to make the finals and three years of misery complaining about a max player playing one out of four years.

---

I'll take 1 year with a chance and 3 miserable years any day over 4 below average years with zero chance

No

quote:

---

36-46 last season, 13-23 since Zion got hurt.

What evidence do you have that we're anything other than a fringe bottom 5 team without Zion?

---

Pretty simple, because we aren't giving him away for free. You keep making it seem like our record would be the same after the trade. If you can't even concede that this steam would be better than what we are without Zion after you add what we get in trade then this is stupid and there's no point in even talking about it.

quote:

---

You can't argue we should trade because he never plays, but let's trade him for a huge haul, that doesn't make sense

---

This is a hypothetical. In my hypothetical we got Jimmy Butler and a 1st (I'm perfectly fine listening to another player/pick scenario). In your hypothetical we get nothing and the team is the exact same as they are now. I'm not saying we get a haul for him or peak value, but we would still get something good.

quote:

---

I don't know what scenario you're mentioning but the scenario of this team without Zion is bad, we are a terrible team without him.

---

Meaning that you said you'd take Zion for 25% of four seasons. We have had Zion play for about 30%(ish) of four seasons, better than your scenario, and look what it's gotten us.

quote:

---

Pretty simple, because we aren't giving him away for free.

---

I don't think you're getting what you think

quote:

---

You keep making it seem like our record would be the same after the trade. If you can't even concede that this steam would be better than what we are without Zion after you add what we get in trade then this is stupid and there's no point in even talking about it.

---

How much better is the question?

We are the equivalent of a sub 30 win team this season since Zion went down. Do you realize how good a player has to be to make a team THAT bad become a good team? Whoever that guy is, he will not be traded for Zion. We can't do the "he never plays, trade him" thing while also assuming you can get a huge haul for him. That doesn't make sense.

Also, you're not factoring that we wouldn't have been 23-12 with whoever this mythical person is we trade for. So sure, maybe they turn that 13-23 into something like 18-18, but that 23-12 is also going to be worse, so back to my original question, how much better can this trade make a bottom 5 ish team?

quote:

---

I'm not saying we get a haul for him or peak value, but we would still get something good.

---

I don't see a scenario where we get a player or players that can take us from bottom 5 ish to good. I just don't see it. But again, if Zion is THAT valuable, then we should keep him because he can be that valuable or good for us. We're gonna go in circles here, but if you think Zion will just always be hurt and let's get rid of him, that's basically dumping him. You're not getting a good return for dumping an injured dude.

quote:

---

Meaning that you said you'd take Zion for 25% of four seasons. We have had Zion play for about 30%(ish) of four seasons, better than your scenario, and look what it's gotten us.

---

Again, if you think Zion gives a team no chance to win, why do you think he'll get a return of good player and 1st round picks?

It just doesn't make sense.

Let me help: All of what you said makes a good point. Now imagine, the reason that friend keeps that high dollar luxury car garaged is that, every time he takes it out to use as intended, it breaks and sits for months on end....all the while costing the owner millions of dollars and depreciating in value every year.