Wherein I Violate the Sacred Timeline...

I know, I know Zion's getting antsy, Griff can't afford anymore youngsters, it's all about "win now" vets. But...

If you were GM would you consider any of the following offseason moves to reset the Pels timeline...

(Note: all deals are trade-machine approved, if not Pels Roost approved, and assume Lonzo retained but Hart let go...)

1. Pels/Cavs

-Pelicans send Brandon Ingram and Eric Bledsoe to the Cavs in exchange for Kevin Love + Taurean Prince and the #3 pick. Pels then select Jalen Suggs + Moses Moody or Corey Kispert;

2. Pels/Magic

-Pelicans send Brandon Ingram to the Magic in exchange for Gary Harris, Wendell Carter, Jr., Chuma Okeke + the #5 pick. Pels then select Jonathan Kuminga + Keon Johnson;

3. Pels/Warriors

-Pelicans send Brandon Ingram + picks # 35 and #38 to Golden State in exchange for Andrew Wiggins + the #7 pick and the #14 pick. Pels then select Davion Mitchell + Franz Wagner or Usman Garuba.


So variant timeline top 10s+ next season...

Scenario I (Pels/Cavs):

PG: Suggs/Lewis
SG: Ball/NAW(Naji)
SF: Prince/Moody-Kispert
PF: Zion/Love
C: Adams/Hayes

Scenario II (Pels/Magic)

PG: Ball/Lewis
SG: NAW/Harris (Keon)
SF: Kuminga/Marshall (Naji)
PF: Zion/Carter Jr.
C: Adams/Hayes

Scenario III (Pels/Warriors)

PG: Mitchell/Lewis
SG: Ball/NAW
SF: Wiggins/Naji
PF: Zion/Wagner-Garuba
C: Adams/Hayes

Any takers or are you reporting these to the TVA for pruning? Keep in mind all draft picks are subject to alternative branching...

Let me ask people this -- Should Zion's age matter?

What I mean by this is that we seem to talk about '21 year olds' as if it is a universal thing. All 21 year olds are the same, and if your best player is 21, you should build with other young 20-somethings so that when that guy is "ready" they will be too.

But arent we seeing that certain early 20s guy can go and win now if given the right pieces? Imagine Zion is the same exact player, but is 26. Are you now advocating for Beal and Lillard? Of course you are. So, the age thing is what is getting in peoples way. Instead of looking at age, look at where the player is skill wise and act accordingly. The Mavericks arent surrounding Luka with a bunch of 20 yr olds. Hawks went and got a bunch of vets to help Trae. Now, if I had a RJ Barrett as my best player, I would build much slower because he isnt ready to be a big time player yet. But if I have Ja, Trae, Luka, Zion, etc..... I am giving them great players to play with. And winning. There is no reason you cant win now and later. You think Phoenix will just be horrible in 3 years once CP3 leaves?

Duncan won right away and they rebuilt again around him on the fly once Robinson, Elliot, Avery, etc left. You guys act like its an either/or. Either win now or in the future. And never acknowledge both is possible

Obviously, I'm having some fun here but actually all those hypotheticals involve veterans coming back to the Pels (Prince/Love/Harris/Carter Jr./Wiggins+Lonzo staying). Plus this draft has some guys I like (Kispert/Mitchell) who are older than Zion and I think can come in and play minutes off the bat.

I get veterans are a safer bet because they have a track record in the pros. But as we saw with Dell, the "young vets" model has it's own pitfalls I'd be happy to see the Pels be aggressive in bringing in both picks and players (assuming they can dump Bledsoe). Of course the Pels real world lynchpin issue is whether to bring back Lonzo and, at some juncture, whether Ingram and Zion are the right fit. I get that issue can be kicked down the road, but you could press a reset in this draft using Ingram as the asset. Doubt very much that happens, but this is the time of year to game out such things...

Find a path that works every time and everyone will do that. You are just super sensitive with regard to the trade picks for vets path because it recently failed with your favorite team. If you were a fan of the Kings or Wolves you would think the idea of just getting you guys every year and building that way was dumb and would envy the Suns for going and getting CP3 to expedite their timeline

But every path fails way more often than it succeeds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Let me ask people this -- Should Zion's age matter?

What I mean by this is that we seem to talk about '21 year olds' as if it is a universal thing. All 21 year olds are the same, and if your best player is 21, you should build with other young 20-somethings so that when that guy is "ready" they will be too.

But arent we seeing that certain early 20s guy can go and win now if given the right pieces? Imagine Zion is the same exact player, but is 26. Are you now advocating for Beal and Lillard? Of course you are. So, the age thing is what is getting in peoples way. Instead of looking at age, look at where the player is skill wise and act accordingly. The Mavericks arent surrounding Luka with a bunch of 20 yr olds. Hawks went and got a bunch of vets to help Trae. Now, if I had a RJ Barrett as my best player, I would build much slower because he isnt ready to be a big time player yet. But if I have Ja, Trae, Luka, Zion, etc..... I am giving them great players to play with. And winning. There is no reason you cant win now and later. You think Phoenix will just be horrible in 3 years once CP3 leaves?

Duncan won right away and they rebuilt again around him on the fly once Robinson, Elliot, Avery, etc left. You guys act like its an either/or. Either win now or in the future. And never acknowledge both is possible

---

Tried explaining this to a friend the other day and it went over his head. Imagine Zion with some real players around him, scary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Tried explaining this to a friend the other day and it went over his head.

---

We all have problems adjusting to new things. NBA history says that a guy cant win big until his late 20s. That he wont hit his prime to his mid to late 20s, etc. So we were all raised with this idea of building slow when your team gets a stud 20 yr old. But I might go the other way with Zion. I wouldnt be suprised if his best years are ages 21-27 and then his body starts wearing down, or more likely, the things that make him unique just arent there any more. Without his burst, 2nd jump, etc, he is either an undersized 4 or an oversized guard who cant shoot. This might be the Zion window. He might have a Larry Johnson or Blake Griffin esque career where he is a role player by his late 20s/early 30s. Go by how he plays, not his age

I can't help but wonder why so many are on the "Trade BI NOW" bandwagon. Though not nearly as explosive as Zion, Ingram has considerably more game than # 1 at present; Williamson's game has a long way to go (if ever) to be as versatile as Ingram. Also, Zion has missed significant time due to injury in each of the last three seasons.

Further, this club has to go back to the beginning of the century to find a SF who was as lethal as BI (and Jamal Mashburn was never the long range threat that BI is).

Why some folks would be so quick to dump BI in favor of a fading, yesteryear hero (in the last three seasons Kevin Love has played at total of 103 regular season games) and some speculative draft choices throws me for a loop.

Besides, in the end, I'm beginning to believe that Zion's biggest contribution to the Pelicans will ultimately be as a trading chip to a big market team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by As I See It

I can't help but wonder why so many are on the "Trade BI NOW" bandwagon. Though not nearly as explosive as Zion, Ingram has considerably more game than # 1 at present; Williamson's game has a long way to go (if ever) to be as versatile as Ingram. Also, Zion has missed significant time due to injury in each of the last three seasons.

Further, this club has to go back to the beginning of the century to find a SF who was as lethal as BI (and Jamal Mashburn was never the long range threat that BI is).

Why some folks would be so quick to dump BI in favor of a fading, yesteryear hero (in the last three seasons Kevin Love has played at total of 103 regular season games) and some speculative draft choices throws me for a loop.

Besides, in the end, I'm beginning to believe that Zion's biggest contribution to the Pelicans will ultimately be as a trading chip to a big market team.

---

So.many?

Thats where i disagree. Sure, a few arent fans but I would say the overwhelming majority want to keep him and would only move him for an upgrade like Lillard or perhaps a better fit like Jaylen Brown

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

We all have problems adjusting to new things. NBA history says that a guy cant win big until his late 20s. That he wont hit his prime to his mid to late 20s, etc. So we were all raised with this idea of building slow when your team gets a stud 20 yr old. But I might go the other way with Zion. I wouldnt be suprised if his best years are ages 21-27 and then his body starts wearing down, or more likely, the things that make him unique just arent there any more. Without his burst, 2nd jump, etc, he is either an undersized 4 or an oversized guard who cant shoot. This might be the Zion window. He might have a Larry Johnson or Blake Griffin esque career where he is a role player by his late 20s/early 30s. Go by how he plays, not his age

---

Exactly, his body is built for now and he’s looking like one of the best and most efficient scorers to ever play the game. We are ready now, this Zion with some players in their prime now along with some past their prime vets but still good at what they do like a PJ tucker and this team is dangerous

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Exactly, his body is built for now and he’s looking like one of the best and most efficient scorers to ever play the game. We are ready now, this Zion with some players in their prime now along with some past their prime vets but still good at what they do like a PJ tucker and this team is dangerous

---

One could argue that his body has not been able to stand up to the rigors of the NBA to date.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by As I See It

One could argue that his body has not been able to stand up to the rigors of the NBA to date.

---

12 months ago you could've claimed that, now you can't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Find a path that works every time and everyone will do that. You are just super sensitive with regard to the trade picks for vets path because it recently failed with your favorite team. If you were a fan of the Kings or Wolves you would think the idea of just getting you guys every year and building that way was dumb and would envy the Suns for going and getting CP3 to expedite their timeline

But every path fails way more often than it succeeds.

---

No question my New Orleans NBA fandom has left some psychic scars going back to when as a little kid I saw Maravich blow out his knee attempting a half-court between the legs pass! Freely confess I prefer building a team to buying one. But if the Pels big move was to get an all-time great PG to run the show, manage clutch possessions and install some accountability, I'd be all for it. We are desperate for a leader on the floor when it matters as our late-game collapses last season revealed.

On paths to success, of course there are multiple ways to go. I even accept Dell was unlucky and never got to see his vision fully realized on the floor. But I hated the Cousins move. And I hate to see Griff start to grasp at straws to save his job as I believe Dell ended up doing. Maybe the real differentiation is that I am, as you say, a hometown fan. As such I'll be with the team no matter what, Zion or no Zion, whatever. I'm tired of the sound of the ticking clock and, as I wrote in another post, have grown to question if landing mega-stars is even in the best interest of a small market team. I'm a fan of the Jazz, the Grizzlies, etc... that get to build their team away from the glare of spotlight and the perpetual Damoclesian question of how to satisfy their soon-to-be-disgruntled unicorn...

I think you guys are going a little too hard on Griff for thinking he is just unloading assets to get guys that will help now with no thought of the future. He can unload a lot to improve now and still have a bright future. Lets say he trades Ingram, Kira, and 3-4 picks for Lillard....

He would still be pick neutral - unlike Dell when he traded picks for Jrue or Omer, etc, and he would still have quality young players who will get better in Zion, NAW, and Hayes. Didi, Naji, and a boatload of 2nd rounders as lotto tickets - and what we have seen historically is those guys tend to make it more often on good teams where they can start with a set role, master that, and grow from there. Teams like Toronto arent better at identifying diamonds in the rough, they are better at bringing them in and giving them a specific role to master, then growing their skill set out from there.

TLDR; This idea that winning now and winning later are mutually exclusive is the fault in some peoples logic IMO. Winning now can set a foundation and expectation for young guys, who develop better as a result, and help you win later. This idea of getting a bunch of guys on the same timeline and having them grow together, stay together, win together, etc..... outside of Golden State, I havent seen that happen. Windows for most cores are 3-5 years, regardless if they are young guys, old guys, or a combination of young and old. The idea of a bunch of 20 year olds staying together 8-10 years is a fan fantasy that doesnt happen in reality

Well, Griff hasn't started unloading assets...yet (other than in Adams deal). It just feels he's being pressured into advancing his timeline and abandoning the concept of "organic" growth that he touted when he was hired. Maybe that won't come to pass. And, if it does, Griff is partly to blame as his decision to go into the season paying Bledsoe and Adams $45+ million cost the team and employing his third head coach in a two-year span has fed doubts about his competence and greatly amplified the voices of nay-sayers around the league.

Of course things can turn around. We've got Zion and Brandon and some good assets. Even Lonzo may break our way if we keep him at a reasonable price. I have doubts about how Brandon and Zion fit together, but maybe the next coach can straighten that out. I think my greatest concern was a sense of something mushy at the center of this team. As Jeff Van Gundy put it the other night, you need some knife fighters to win in the NBA. Not sure we have any right now. A big selling point for Adams and Bledsoe was to raise the competitive metabolism of the roster. That didn't happen. Hard to tell how much of that how to do with Covid, or Stan Van, or just being a young team. But with the core players going into their 3rd-6th seasons, the youth excuse won't fly next season.

On player development, I'm a big fan of drafting guys in the 2nd round who can start by filling out a set role (shooter, defender, playmaker) and let them grow from there. I hope we make use of our (way overdue) G-League franchise to start building a "Pelican way" in the model of some other successful franchises. I think that's particularly important for a small-market team like ours.

The Pelicans really need to be flexible right now. If you get good rebuilding value for Ingram and therefore have to take a step back for a season so be it.

That said these trades are WAAAAAY off. I don?t think some people realize how hard it is to hit on draft picks. Like hitting on any of these to hope to get a player who is as talent as Ingram but fits better with Zion is like a 20% proposition, maybe even less. On top of that all of these deals include ugly contracts coming back in addition to the underwhelming package of picks and 0 young prospects.

If there were another Ingram out there right now wouldn?t you have no quarrel peddling pick 10 and more on top of Bledsoe? But you want us to take Wiggins 7 and 14 for Ingram?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelifan

The Pelicans really need to be flexible right now. If you get good rebuilding value for Ingram and therefore have to take a step back for a season so be it.

That said these trades are WAAAAAY off. I don?t think some people realize how hard it is to hit on draft picks. Like hitting on any of these to hope to get a player who is as talent as Ingram but fits better with Zion is like a 20% proposition, maybe even less. On top of that all of these deals include ugly contracts coming back in addition to the underwhelming package of picks and 0 young prospects.

If there were another Ingram out there right now wouldn?t you have no quarrel peddling pick 10 and more on top of Bledsoe? But you want us to take Wiggins 7 and 14 for Ingram?

---

Great post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Great post.

---

Hey, wait a minute, HG!:

GSW: ingram
NOP: wiggins, poole, no 7 2021, no 14 2021

this is a good deal that i would take...
Looks good in the long run but we would be a worse team next year, which I don?t think would fly with Zion and Gayle


Personally, I think more of Wiggins than most. He's improved most aspects of his game, just like Ingram, and was even something of a defensive stopper (!) for the Warriors last season. He's not as good as Ingram, but he's a good starting SF and his contract only runs two more years, making it a good timeline fit.

I'm not down on Ingram, but I'm not sure he's a great fit next to Zion (mainly for defensive reasons but also because I'm not sure he really accepts being a number two guy) and if the Pels think that too, this is juncture where you could make a move.

I just put some trades out there for inspection that I thought were at least realistic. What do your offseason deals look like, if any?

Part of the problem is Zion. He's no where near the defender he was at Duke. He needs to focus on getting a body that's best fit for professional basketball. Unfortunately BI has the same issues defensively. You need at least one of your main 3 guys to be a really good two way player (realistically you probably need 2 of 3) in order to win big in this league traditionally. Right now Zion and BI aren't those guys and as long as that's the case we aren't going to have long term success.