. |
Yeah I think Rondo is going to hurt the most.
If we had Rondo I could make an argument that we would be better than the team that went 21-13 after Cousins went down. Because undeniably we would be by adding Randle.
Problem is we replace Rondo with an obvious downgrade that is going to need a MIP type turnaround to not just be a fringe playoff team next season. And there is good reason to believe we saw peak Jrue without Rondo helping run the offense to get him easy looks and maximize his somewhat unique skillset and play style that takes a hit when forced to lead the offense or play with lesser point guards.
So who are the possible SF targets for AA or Hill and a 1st round pick or 2?
Am I the only one that realizes Rondo was only good in spurts? Didn't play most 4th quarters and barely played in an elimination game 5?
All the vet leadership talk is being overblown because the entire core should have grown up massively last year.
So wilson chandler can be traded, is he worth giving up solo an a first to philly?
Rondo was cool and all. Wish we had him. But the upgrade front court more than makes up for his leaving. We are a better team now than we were last postseason. Undeniable.
The big question will be what the other mid to late playoff seed teams do. Some of them will look at GS, Houston, and LAL and fold. Choose to rebuild another two or three seasons. Some will wait to see who folds to see if they can take the scraps and ascend into the top three.
Like the Niko trade last season, I wouldn't be surprised if we were able to get a great player mid-season that we're not even contemplating now from a team that gets demoralized.
Good positive energy.
But also, yo mama's fat.
He's only 25 years old, shot 41% from 3 last year on 5.6 attempts per game, put up per 100s of 28/8/3.6, has always had a positive net rating (although only a small one, +2 for last year), PER of 17.1, VORP of 1.8, 6.7 total win shares. Not a great defender, but not tragically bad either. I could see him fitting in pretty well.
Basketball.
One thing that I've been thinking about in the back of my mind is the Randle deal. Its 2 yrs, but year 2 is a player option. Should we be concerned that he'll just use us this one year and then opt out and move on again? Its so damn hard to build a decent lineup when you can't keep a good piece more than a year or two.
Jules could be a star here, or he could be Terrance Jones, it really is all about who comes to play.
If you Jimmer it, they will come.
Isn’t Harris too slow to play the 3, but not big enough to play the 4?
Yes he could, but apparently he is good friends with AD, and he already took a pay cut to come here (he couldve gotten more, he was only on the market 2 hours)
I could see him opting out and us offering him 120%, which would bring him to about 9.5, then the following year we could offer him a non-bird max if hes worth it
There are only so many good (and I use that term loosely) small forwards in the NBA. So few that you have guys who are getting paid $18MM and $19MM a year, and being moved a year or so later because their teams realize that they aren’t even serviceable.
So why would anyone give us even a mediocre sf for Hill, Ajinca, and a late first round pick? I mean where is the sense in that for the other team? They get a couple of busted up players and have to give up a rare resource?
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)