re: Would you rather that pick back or Queen

quote:

---

Why would take that trade if it was a protected pick? Are you adding additional selections?

---

Atlanta very likely still makes the trade with some protections, yes.

To answer the question - I’d take Queen. Watching him distribute the ball, run the break, finish with left head and right head equally at the rim (are you watching Zion!), get to the rim from anywhere . . . I’d take Queen right now over an unknown 2026 lottery.

I still believe we could have added protections and think we could have protected against a top 3 doomsday scenario.

quote:

---

These teams fully embraced a tank and stuck to the process and they’re benefiting greatly from it.

---

And there are just as many examples of teams that tanked, and got picks that sucked. For example, GSW tanked the year that Steph was hurt and got the #2 pick and used it to take James Wiseman. The Warriors still won the following year without Wiseman, but the failure of that pick ultimately caused the end of the dynasty.

Philly tanked for years, and what do they have to show for it?

quote:

---

And there are just as many examples of teams that tanked, and got picks that sucked. For example, GSW tanked the year that Steph was hurt and got the #2 pick and used it to take James Wiseman. The Warriors still won the following year without Wiseman, but the failure of that pick ultimately caused the end of the dynasty.

Philly tanked for years, and what do they have to show for it?

---

Uhh, did you forget the Warriors were one of the worst teams in the league before they drafted Curry, Thompson, and Green and won a title? Tanking is a multi-year process. It’s not a one season gamble where a team tries to hit on one pick.

The 76ers tanked for 4 seasons and then finished 3rd in the East the next two seasons and finished 1st in the East in 2021. They were a top 3 team for like 6 straight seasons.

Does tanking guarantee a championship? Of course not. But a proper tank often turns a team into a contender.

The Pelicans never tanked. They have been bad due to injuries and other factors while still trying to win. They never cleared the books and had a vision for a complete and proper rebuild. They seemed to have hit on Fears and Queen. They should be the first two picks of a multi-year rebuild. Continuing to try to win with them on the roster is just going to lead to more mediocrity and hitting on those picks will be wasted. Instead, they could clear the books and draft and entire team of players with talent like Fears and Queen. 3 and 4 years later they’d be competing for a title rather than 3 or 4 years later still piddling around near the play-in spot.

quote:

---

don’t understand how people refuse to acknowledge this. Bunch of idiots.

---

You are just saying this without any proof or evidence to back it up.

You say with protections. What would they be? Top 4 or 5? If it doesn't convey what are the protections for the next year or the next?

If I'm the Hawks GM and I have the 13th pick, and a top 5-10 guy that slid to me (and I need front court depth). You come to me, as the Pelicans GM and offer me a pick out of the top 20, plus a 1st rounder next year, I'm interested. But then you want to protect it top 5. So where's my value? I'm moving back out of the top 20 and get a pick that maybe falls 6-15 next year. Or even worse, I don't get until 2027 or 2028. How is that attractive?

People on this board legit insisted that Troy Weaver only drafted Queen because he was too lazy to scout outside of the DC area. They said that we only drafted DQ because Weaver's son was friends with him. Go back and look at the summer league threads and see how much people made fun of him. This board repeated ad nauseum the national talking heads' idiocy that the trade had destroyed the future of the franchise.

I haven't seen any of those posters actually eating any crow.

quote:

---

Are they psychic now? You knew Haliburton was getting hurt in the finals or they would conduct a rebuild while he's out? Nobody knew that and nobody thought it was a bad deal at the time. It's bad luck, but that's not something people could possibly know.

---

BS. Absolutely no reason to trade that pick while they were still playing. Zero. A poster in here even called it before it happened. And you were probably one of the posters arguing with me they were a playoff lock even w/o Haliburton.

If anything we could have got an additional player or future pick out of them once Haliburton went down. Pick became much more valuable. And Dumars just lit that extra value on fire.

Dumars was plain idiotic with that trade. He had tunnel vision to get Queen and nothing else. If anything maybe the Hawks or another team bite on the Pacers pick with Haliburton out and allow us to trade our pick with protections on it.

It’s also amazing that Queen has now become a bonafide super staff and no player has every flashed a few games their rookie year only to become irrelevant for the rest of their careers.

Queen has looked good the last string of games. He’s looked very good. It could mean absolutely nothing in the long run and the trade could still be a complete calamity. It may turn out he becomes an all pro.

In the end, nothing ever justified the pick trades made last season as they were made. Dumars compounded and utterly awful decision everyone saw in trading the Pacers pick back too early and then compounded it by trading next year’s first without any protections.

In the end, maybe ATL doesn’t go for it, but the fact they didn’t even try to get protections and compounding it with all the other stupid decisions isn’t excused by a good stretch by Queen.

A Queen’s a Queen, but a draft pick could be anything! It could even be QUEEN! You know how much we’ve always wanted one of those! We’ll take the pick!

The obvious answer is both. Because if we would have simply put a Top 5 protection, which Atlanta would have accepted, we would have both. It’s mind boggling how hard it is for some people to understand this.