AD trade scenarios...

So if AD specifically states the teams that he prefers, does Ainge still pony up for him? I say no but stranger things have happened.

It's not a matter of whether Boston will still be interested. It's a matter of what they're willing to give up. Boston going all in trumps all other offers, but Boston willing to make a deal if the price is right and they keep some of their assets does not.

I think Boston sees how rich the asking price is, and if they can get away with keeping Tatum, they'll make an offer. Or if they can get away with offering Tatum and filler, but keep Smart, Brown, and Memphis pick they'll do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UptownFuz504

So if AD specifically states the teams that he prefers, does Ainge still pony up for him? I say no but stranger things have happened.

---

Depends on a bunch of stuff we don't know.

Does Ainge think getting AD will convince Kyrie to return? Then yeah, he probably still ponies up.

If he thinks Kyrie is gone with no chance of coming back, then probably not.

Unless he is worried about the superteam in his own conference, and then maybe he does.

Or maybe he thinks acquiring AD will allow him to acquire another star who isn't Kyrie, like Jimmy Butler or something. Then maybe.

Too many variables to be sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

It's not a matter of whether Boston will still be interested. It's a matter of what they're willing to give up. Boston going all in trumps all other offers, but Boston willing to make a deal if the price is right and they keep some of their assets does not.

I think Boston sees how rich the asking price is, and if they can get away with keeping Tatum, they'll make an offer. Or if they can get away with offering Tatum and filler, but keep Smart, Brown, and Memphis pick they'll do that.

---

I want Tatum, Brown, Smart, #14, #20 and Memphis 2020 pick. My guess is they will offer Tatum, Brown or Smart, filler #14 and 2020 Memphis pick . Or, they could push to unload Hayward if we want both Tatum and Brown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

I want Tatum, Brown, Smart, #14, #20 and Memphis 2020 pick. My guess is they will offer Tatum, Brown or Smart, filler #14 and 2020 Memphis pick . Or, they could push to unload Hayward if we want both Tatum and Brown.

---

Do you take Hayward if you get both Brown and Tatum? I probably do, even though I really really really dislike that awful contract, I don't think he'll ever be as good as he was in Utah again, and I don't even think that standard was worth the money in the first place.

Danny Ainge didn't say Anthony Davis' name... but, well, here ya go:

“We’re not afraid of risk. We made a risk by trading for Kyrie [irivng] ... I’ll never regret that. You just move on to the next deal.”

What that could mean for #Pelicans, others #NBA⬇️https://t.co/C1Hg302w0O

— Jeff Nowak (@Jeff_Nowak) June 5, 2019

''“There’s always risk in making deals,” Ainge said, according to a report from the Boston Globe. “We’re not afraid of risk. We made a risk by trading for Kyrie and, no matter what happens with Kyrie, I’ll never regret that. You just move on to the next deal.”

Ainge's comments come just a day after a report that Pelicans Executive Vice President David Griffin had begun "listening to offers" for Davis, who requested a trade midway through the 2018-'19 season, adding that he would not sign the 5-year, $239.5 million contract extension he'd be eligible for. That news, less than a week removed from a meeting between Griffin, Davis and his agent Rich Paul kicked off what will surely become a whirlwind of trade rumors leading up to the NBA Draft on June 20. ''


And here's the link to the Boston Globe article that's being referenced: https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/c...DlJ/story.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UptownFuz504

So if AD specifically states the teams that he prefers, does Ainge still pony up for him? I say no but stranger things have happened.

---

That was before the trade deadline when he was trying to force his way out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Do you take Hayward if you get both Brown and Tatum? I probably do, even though I really really really dislike that awful contract, I don't think he'll ever be as good as he was in Utah again, and I don't even think that standard was worth the money in the first place.

---

I think I would. I just saw that MM has gone from his odds being Boston 95%, NY 5% a couple of months ago to 60% Lakers, 15% Celtics, 15% Pels, 5% NY, 5% Nets.

http://amicohoops.net/source-celtics...ade-for-davis/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

I think I would. I just saw that MM has gone from his odds being Boston 95%, NY 5% a couple of months ago to 60% Lakers, 15% Celtics, 15% Pels, 5% NY, 5% Nets.

---

It helps if you remember that MM's odds are just made up off the top of his head and don't actually mean anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

It helps if you remember that MM's odds are just made up off the top of his head and don't actually mean anything.

---

Lakers are also favored to land Davis on the gambling sites.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

I think I would. I just saw that MM has gone from his odds being Boston 95%, NY 5% a couple of months ago to 60% Lakers, 15% Celtics, 15% Pels, 5% NY, 5% Nets.

---

Why are Pels at 15%? That makes noo sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Lakers are also favored to land Davis on the gambling sites.

---

Sure. And if MM had said ''I think the Lakers are the most likely destination'', then that's one thing.

But for him to assign each team specific percentage chances? It's just guess work and we all know it. ''Oh there's a 15% chance of him going to Boston but only a 5% chance of him going to the Nets'' like shut up Mike, we all know you're just making stuff up on the fly to sound smart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Sure. And if MM had said ''I think the Lakers are the most likely destination'', then that's one thing.

But for him to assign each team specific percentage chances? It's just guess work and we all know it. ''Oh there's a 15% chance of him going to Boston but only a 5% chance of him going to the Nets'' like shut up Mike, we all know you're just making stuff up on the fly to sound smart.

---

It's gonna be a long 2 weeks.

I’m not buying that AD would not resign with the Celtics and that Kyrie leaving has any significance in Ainge making a trade. I don’t think the plan has been to pair Kyrie with Davis at all. I think the plan is to get cap space in order to use a mix of draft picks and players that fit with AD’s playstyle( hopefully they know lol). With that being said, i would bet we will take on Hayward and offload Hill in a trade. Ainge has said recently that he is impressed with Haywards work ethic so that seals it for me. They are going to be without a point guard. Although Rozier is restricted, it seems he wants to leave. Which means there is a good chance he forces a sign and trade IMO.

Unless they plan to run Smart at the point, i would imagine they are looking to sign and trade Rozier. Horford is also a possibility as a sign and trade move but all indications are he wants to stay in Boston and i think would actually be a good mentor and big next to AD on the court.

Finally, i think Boston has learned that having multiple draft picks every year just gets you to the conference finals if you’re lucky. AD is a sure thing when it comes to talent and they will bet on his maturity.

With that said, i think we will trade with Boston and third team.

Pels: Tatum, Hayward, pick 14, pick 20, 2020 Memphis pick and player from third team

Celtics: AD, Hill, point guard from third team

Third Team: Rozier, Smart, pick 21, Pels 2nd rounder?, Moore?

Anyone else impressed MM hit 100% on both of his projections? Figured the narcissist would allow himself to go to 120.

Anyway, since it is apparently amateur hour, I'll throw out mine....

Knicks 40%
Lakers 35%
Boston 15%
Nets 5%
Clippers 3%
Pelicans 2%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Sure. And if MM had said ''I think the Lakers are the most likely destination'', then that's one thing.

But for him to assign each team specific percentage chances? It's just guess work and we all know it. ''Oh there's a 15% chance of him going to Boston but only a 5% chance of him going to the Nets'' like shut up Mike, we all know you're just making stuff up on the fly to sound smart.

---

He's been pushing the Lakers package real hard the last few days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

He's been pushing the Lakers package real hard the last few days.

---

Yeah, I know. He was arguing with Shamit that we should trade for Lonzo because Lonzo would go pretty high in this draft if he was in this draft class.

Which is just such a stupid argument that it's incredible. Maybe he would go highly, but draft position is only an indicator of ability and once someone has actually been in the NBA we don't need to ask where they would be drafted or not because their production speaks for itself. Plus, this is a famously shallow draft: someone going top 5 in it isn't THAT impressive when you consider that basically nobody thinks there's more than about 3 or 4 really good prospects in this draft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Yeah, I know. He was arguing with Shamit that we should trade for Lonzo because Lonzo would go pretty high in this draft if he was in this draft class.

Which is just such a stupid argument that it's incredible. Maybe he would go highly, but draft position is only an indicator of ability and once someone has actually been in the NBA we don't need to ask where they would be drafted or not because their production speaks for itself. Plus, this is a famously shallow draft: someone going top 5 in it isn't THAT impressive when you consider that basically nobody thinks there's more than about 3 or 4 really good prospects in this draft.

---

Yeah, he is only pushing the positives about a Laker deal and not admitting that the DVT with Ingram could be an issue or not showing concern for the fact that Ball has missed 40% of his games in his career.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

He's been pushing the Lakers package real hard the last few days.

---

It was the Nets just before then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

It was the Nets just before then.

---

He'll be onto the Clippers in a few days. We'll get a wonderful set of arguments from him for whichever team any given person has in mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Yeah, he is only pushing the positives about a Laker deal and not admitting that the DVT with Ingram could be an issue or not showing concern for the fact that Ball has missed 40% of his games in his career.

---

Any reassurance about the Ingram blood clot from LA needs to be treated like a grain of salt. The only thing that any of us needs to believe is that if he gets another Blood clot. His career is most likely over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taker597

Any reassurance about the Ingram blood clot from LA needs to be treated like a grain of salt. The only thing that any of us needs to believe is that if he gets another Blood clot. His career is most likely over.

---

yea that blood clot is potential career ending however some reports say its not an issue but I personally wouldnt take the chance.

If Lonzo projected to be a slightly bigger version of Ricky Rubio, and a more versatile defender, wouldn't the majority of this board want to pair that guy with Zion???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

If Lonzo projected to be a slightly bigger version of Ricky Rubio, and a more versatile defender, wouldn't the majority of this board want to pair that guy with Zion???

---

Lonzo is not a bad player. He has some weaknesses, particularly FT shooting. My bigger concerns with him are the distractions of his father and his health (particularly his feet). He has missed nearly 40% of his career games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

If Lonzo projected to be a slightly bigger version of Ricky Rubio, and a more versatile defender, wouldn't the majority of this board want to pair that guy with Zion???

---

If Lonzo was a free agent with no drama attached who would cost sub-$8m and shot 85% from the free throw line and was a near lock for 70 games a year, then maybe.

Unfortunately, we're talking about him as a key part in a trade for a top 5 player, who is going to get paid relatively soon, who plays barely over half his games and who shoots 44% from the FT line and is therefore a complete liability on offense. Rubio can't score but at least they can't hack him

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Lonzo is not a bad player. He has some weaknesses, particularly FT shooting. My bigger concerns with him are the distractions of his father and his health (particularly his feet). He has missed nearly 40% of his career games.

---

Yea he shot near 40% from the FT which is horrible beyond belief....Shaq shot over 50%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pels4Life

Yea he shot near 40% from the FT which is horrible beyond belief....Shaq shot over 50%

---

Lonzo is legitimately one of the worst FT shooters of all time.

The only other people I can think of who shot such god awful percentages from the FT line are Ben Wallace and Deandre Jordan. Andre Drummond was worse for four years but he shoots 60% from the line now so he's escaped that group.

Lol.

You guys on here harping on this man's FT%. As if the refs would actually give the Pelicans FTs.

(All joke, not condescending)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

Lol.

You guys on here harping on this man's FT%. As if the refs would actually give the Pelicans FTs.

(All joke, not condescending)

---

Worse is, he only shoots 1 FT a game on average, for a PG. He really needs to improve that part of his game.

To me the deal with the FT shooting is he is a PG which is generally the preferred best FT shooter althought its not always the case just preferred. I am surprised he only shoots one a game as you would expect Hack-a-Zo to be a thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

If Lonzo projected to be a slightly bigger version of Ricky Rubio, and a more versatile defender, wouldn't the majority of this board want to pair that guy with Zion???

---

The way the roster is set up right now and Duke struggles throughout the season with spacing. I think backcourt would need a sure thing shooter at PG or SG more so than a center that can create space..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pels4Life

To me the deal with the FT shooting is he is a PG which is generally the preferred best FT shooter althought its not always the case just preferred. I am surprised he only shoots one a game as you would expect Hack-a-Zo to be a thing.

---

Part of the reason Hack-a-Zo isn't a big thing is that he doesn't attack. A lot of hacking comes where you foul rather than let them shoot. Lonzo doesn't drive, so he doesn't get hacked there, and he's such a dreadful three point shooter you just give him those cause he'll clank them anyway

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Worse is, he only shoots 1 FT a game on average, for a PG. He really needs to improve that part of his game.

---

That actually minimizes it a ton.

In fact, if we are looking at him for play starting, assists, and D.....that renders the FT% argument a bit moot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

That actually minimizes it a ton.

In fact, if we are looking at him for play starting, assists, and D.....that renders the FT% argument a bit moot.

---

Except that you want you PG to be able to shoot FTs. Also, the lack of shots means that instead of driving and creating contact, he is settling for 3s, which is not his best game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

That actually minimizes it a ton.

In fact, if we are looking at him for play starting, assists, and D.....that renders the FT% argument a bit moot.

---

Like I said. The reason he shoots so few is that he cannot drive. A PG who can't drive or shoot is a huge liability on offense. It even minimises his passing ability because he has no offensive gravity with which to manipulate defenses and create opportunities for others.

No no no.

Haha. Ah man. You guys just made this ridiculous. I mean, it IS a weakeness but that's not that big of a deal. It's not the gaping giant hole it's being made out to be.

You guys have been hating on this guy for one free throw a game?!

And the "you need your PG to shoot FT" thing is so old school. Things interchange so much in today's game, if other people can do it, you're fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

No no no.

Haha. Ah man. You guys just made this ridiculous. I mean, it IS a weakeness but that's not that big of a deal.

You guys have been hating on this guy for one free throw a game?!

And the "you need your PG to shoot FT" thing is so old school. Things interchange so much in today's game, if other people can do it, you're fine.

---

If your PG can't shoot, can't drive, and can't shoot FTs, I don't think it's "ridiculous" to think that's a problem.

If he doesn't take many FTs you have to ask WHY that is.

The answer is; he can't drive, so he settles for threes, and he can't shoot either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

If your PG can't shoot, can't drive, and can't shoot FTs, I don't think it's "ridiculous" to think that's a problem.

If he doesn't take many FTs you have to ask WHY that is.

The answer is; he can't drive, so he settles for threes, and he can't shoot either.

---

Let's go back on memory lane a year ago when we beat the Lakers.

https://www.ign.com/boards/threads/l...man.455106669/

A guard that can't shoot in 2019 is about as useful... Well... Ben Simmons in the playoffs. Lol

It IS a big deal he is terrible at the FT line. He's also a terrible shooter all around. The fact you have him in the 40s and Zion in the 60s means you cannot have both of them in the game to close out games. Especially in the playoffs. It just won't work. Defenders will pack the paint and dare Lonzo to shoot, anytime he tries to drive they will just foul him.

With Zion he's big and strong enough that even when he drives he can finish through the contact. Lonzo tries to avoid the contact which is why his FG% is bad and even when he's fouled he cannot make it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

It IS a big deal he is terrible at the FT line. He's also a terrible shooter all around. The fact you have him in the 40s and Zion in the 60s means you cannot have both of them in the game to close out games. Especially in the playoffs. It just won't work. Defenders will pack the paint and dare Lonzo to shoot, anytime he tries to drive they will just foul him.

With Zion he's big and strong enough that even when he drives he can finish through the contact. Lonzo tries to avoid the contact which is why his FG% is bad and even when he's fouled he cannot make it.

---

Ingram is also a 67% FT shooter.

Put Zion, Ingram, and Lonzo out on court at the same time and you are BEGGING to bleed games away at the FT line.

I don’t want the drama. Maybe you could include him in a group deal for #7 or similar.

I know Nelson is good, but he's not a miracle worker. But we atleast can trust that any injuries will be dealt with in as efficient a manner as possible, so I'm less worried about that.

And Lamar is gonna have LaMelo Ball coming into the NBA real soon. He can't helicopter parent both of them at once. So hopefully that deals with that.

I'm not a big fan of Lonzo, but at least he's a great defender and is really good in transition, so...whatever. I can get over it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

If your PG can't shoot, can't drive, and can't shoot FTs, I don't think it's "ridiculous" to think that's a problem.

If he doesn't take many FTs you have to ask WHY that is.

The answer is; he can't drive, so he settles for threes, and he can't shoot either.

---

Lonzo compares very favorably to young Rubio. Rubio was a year older his first two years in the league, but they both shot .315 from 3pt line. Lonzo actually shoots a respectable 5 threes a game, whereas Rubio basically wouldn't shoot. I don't think anyone here would say they would't want young Rubio on the team, and Lonzo is actually a better rebounder and defender.

How about Ben Simmons? Simmons makes Lonzo look like Steph Curry as a shooter. Both guys are big/versatile defenders. Lonzo is younger. Simmons missed an entire season with a foot injury. Is Simmons significantly better than Lonzo???

If the trade was Ben Simmons, Brandon Ingram, Kuzma, and the 1st pick... would anyone in the NBA Universe think that wasn't an insane return for AD????

What % of Ben Simmons is Lonzo Ball? 100, 90, 80...? The only edge Simmons has is the 4 inches, but both are big for the position, so you can't really knock Lonzo for that.

Lonzo is a cross between Ricky Rubio and Ben Simmons, and yall don't want that. That's crazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Lonzo compares very favorably to young Rubio. Rubio was a year older his first two years in the league, but they both shot .315 from 3pt line. Lonzo actually shoots a respectable 5 threes a game, whereas Rubio basically wouldn't shoot. I don't think anyone here would say they would't want young Rubio on the team, and Lonzo is actually a better rebounder and defender.

How about Ben Simmons? Simmons makes Lonzo look like Steph Curry as a shooter. Both guys are big/versatile defenders. Lonzo is younger. Simmons missed an entire season with a foot injury. Is Simmons significantly better than Lonzo???

If the trade was Ben Simmons, Brandon Ingram, Kuzma, and the 1st pick... would anyone in the NBA Universe think that wasn't an insane return for AD????

What % of Ben Simmons is Lonzo Ball? 100, 90, 80...? The only edge Simmons has is the 4 inches, but both are big for the position, so you can't really knock Lonzo for that.

Lonzo is a cross between Ricky Rubio and Ben Simmons, and yall don't want that. That's crazy.

---

When building a championship team in the west during the GSW dynasty. I wouldn't want a Simmons, Rubio, or Lonzo running point. I don't see it as a recipe for any success. It's more of treading water than actually pushing for a championship. Look at the conference finals... All 4 teams had very good point guards that can shoot and run the offense. When you look at what really hurt the two loser in conferences finals. Their points guard ridiculously outplayed or just played poorly with Lillard & Bledsoe. Talented scorong point guards went from being an albatross in the 2000s to being an essential need for winning a title. Curry changed the game, and a lot of people don't talk about it.

I actually prefer Ben Simmons to Lonzo as he is pretty aggressive driver of the ball which caters to our style of play better. Yea and Ben is from LSU so there is that(j/k).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Lonzo compares very favorably to young Rubio. Rubio was a year older his first two years in the league, but they both shot .315 from 3pt line. Lonzo actually shoots a respectable 5 threes a game, whereas Rubio basically wouldn't shoot. I don't think anyone here would say they would't want young Rubio on the team, and Lonzo is actually a better rebounder and defender.

How about Ben Simmons? Simmons makes Lonzo look like Steph Curry as a shooter. Both guys are big/versatile defenders. Lonzo is younger. Simmons missed an entire season with a foot injury. Is Simmons significantly better than Lonzo???

If the trade was Ben Simmons, Brandon Ingram, Kuzma, and the 1st pick... would anyone in the NBA Universe think that wasn't an insane return for AD????

What % of Ben Simmons is Lonzo Ball? 100, 90, 80...? The only edge Simmons has is the 4 inches, but both are big for the position, so you can't really knock Lonzo for that.

Lonzo is a cross between Ricky Rubio and Ben Simmons, and yall don't want that. That's crazy.

---

If you're asking if Ben Simmons is better than Lonzo Ball, you're already lost.

Simmons cannot shoot, but he can drive. He averages basically 17 PPG on 56% from the floor because he can actually drive. He is a threat to score, and if you foul him, he shoots 60% from the line which is definitely not great but is MUCH better than 41%.

Simmons is a better rebounder than Lonzo, averaging 8.8 RPG as opposed to Lonzo's 5.3, so I'm not sure why you've decided Lonzo is better there.

Ben Simmons has offensive gravity because he is a threat to drive and score, whereas Lonzo just isn't a factor in offensive play. Yes, Simmons, needs to learn to shoot, but so does Lonzo because while you argue that it's "respectable" to shoot 5 threes a game, I would argue that it's only "respectable" if you CAN shoot. Lonzo can't, so when he shoots 5 threes a game it's not "respectable" at all, it's a sign of his fear of driving and indicative of a low scoring IQ.

If Andre Drummond started jacking up threes next season and shot 31% we shouldn't be applauding it as respectable. We'd say he's making dumb offensive plays and wasting possessions because he CANT shoot. Lonzo is in the exact same boat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taker597

When building a championship team in the west during the GSW dynasty. I wouldn't want a Simmons, Rubio, or Lonzo running point. I don't see it as a recipe for any success. It's more of treading water than actually pushing for a championship. Look at the conference finals... All 4 teams had very good point guards that can shoot and run the offense. When you look at what really hurt the two loser in conferences finals. Their points guard ridiculously outplayed or just played poorly with Lillard & Bledsoe.

---

We're not building a championship team in the West during the GSW dynasty. The goal should be to have a championship team in 4 or 5 years and allow Zion to develop. The only player I'm 90+% confident in pairing with Zion 5 years from now is Tatum. If Celtics offer him and other pieces, great!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

We're not building a championship team in the West during the GSW dynasty. The goal should be to have a championship team in 4 or 5 years and allow Zion to develop. The only player I'm 90+% confident in pairing with Zion 5 years from now is Tatum. If Celtics offer him and other pieces, great!

---

dont forget about RJ with the 3rd pick from NY. We have seen RJ and Zion in action and its a pretty good thing with high potential.

I think Ball is a very good player with some obvious weaknesses that need to be corrected or improved. I am in the minority in that I think I would rather keep Ball and hope for improvement than move him for #7 (unless I had guarantees that #7 would help get me to #2). However, I think you are overplaying this Laker deal if you think Ball is even in the same discussion as Simmons.