General Offseason News

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelifan

I'm not talking about value here. "NO is interested in trying to trade for Scoot Henderson" != "NO is willing to offer what it actually takes to get Scoot Henderson."

I'd respect the guts to trade Ingram for an unproven prospect with higher upside, but I don't expect it to happen, or even be offered.

---

Posting it again, Ingram isn't the one that would be traded. There'd be a mutiny in that locker room if he's traded for some unproven rookie not named Wemby.


IMO, Griff isn't going to make any big moves like that to begin with. This is nothing but the usual pre-draft smoke screens. You just saw what stability did for both teams in the finals. Especially Miami.

This is probably an over reaction but I wonder if the drama around his private life would make the Pelicans more willing to trade Zion. Sitting out when he was physically not injured as the team fighting for the postseason was very tough to swallow. Now it comes out that he was busy with other priorities at this exact time frame that he did not “feel like Zion”. His image is certainly hit an all time low.

For sure it does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

Posting it again, Ingram isn't the one that would be traded. There'd be a mutiny in that locker room if he's traded for some unproven rookie not named Wemby.


IMO, Griff isn't going to make any big moves like that to begin with. This is nothing but the usual pre-draft smoke screens. You just saw what stability did for both teams in the finals. Especially Miami.

---

I agree. BI has built himself into untouchable status with the way he bought in and Zion has somehow gone from untouchable because of sheer talent to 'well maybe' for opposite reasons.

Plus.

I don't like the idea of Scoot and Zion together. I think they would get in eachothers way and they don't compliment eachother well. BI, on the other hand, compliments both Scoot and Zion very well.

Just to round out the concept Gordon Hayward’s contract is a virtual match for either BI or Zion and expires after next season.

I heard from a source I consider reliable that last year during Zion’s Oregon sabbatical the Pels front office had had it with him, did not expect him to be on the team going forward. Obviously a lot changed when he got back. But I’ve got to believe there is some residual scar tissue there.

On Brandon, he’s been a team guy, but I there are the reports that the team was frustrated with him sitting out so long with his toe injury.

One thing that may be on Griffin’s mind is team culture, which reads pretty soft at the moment. The team may be willing to shake things up if they think their stars don’t have a championship mindset…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

For sure it does.



I agree. BI has built himself into untouchable status with the way he bought in and Zion has somehow gone from untouchable because of sheer talent to 'well maybe' for opposite reasons.

Plus.

I don't like the idea of Scoot and Zion together. I think they would get in eachothers way and they don't compliment eachother well. BI, on the other hand, compliments both Scoot and Zion very well.

---

I actually think Scoot fits better with Zion than BI. He can get into the lane and take bodies with him and can also hit the mid range.

I get why some people have this emotional attachment to BI - and that this would mean that they aren't enthusiastic about trading him. But I'm not sure where that changes from ''reluctant'' to trade him, to ''refusing to ever'' trade him.

If he had led us on multiple deep playoff runs, or been on the team a decade, or had turned down money to be here, or something like that I think I could get it.

But this is a guy who ''committed'' to the team by signing an extension the same length that CJ did - and nobody cares about CJ like that.

He's won 2 playoff games with us, which is obviously great but it's hardly the stuff lifelong bonds are made of.

He's been here 4 years and in that time, the best we've been is 9th seed.

I get why, given the circumstances those wins happened in and the fact that he represents the success of the Brow trade, people would be reluctant to trade him but untouchable? Really?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

I get why some people have this emotional attachment to BI - and that this would mean that they aren't enthusiastic about trading him. But I'm not sure where that changes from ''reluctant'' to trade him, to ''refusing to ever'' trade him.

If he had led us on multiple deep playoff runs, or been on the team a decade, or had turned down money to be here, or something like that I think I could get it.

But this is a guy who ''committed'' to the team by signing an extension the same length that CJ did - and nobody cares about CJ like that.

He's won 2 playoff games with us, which is obviously great but it's hardly the stuff lifelong bonds are made of.

He's been here 4 years and in that time, the best we've been is 9th seed.

I get why, given the circumstances those wins happened in and the fact that he represents the success of the Brow trade, people would be reluctant to trade him but untouchable? Really?

---

While I do not think the Pels will trade either BI or Zion this year, the only argument or justification I can see for trading BI (although I would not want to) is if they feel Trey can plug right into BI's role and avoid the bigger cap hit of a BI extension.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

I actually think Scoot fits better with Zion than BI. He can get into the lane and take bodies with him and can also hit the mid range.

---

I agree with that.

I also think he's a legitimate point guard who can run legitimate pick and roll, which Zion can be involved in as a roll man very easily.

The only real argument for BI over Scoot in terms of fit, imo, is that BI can shoot threes. But most of these threes are catch and shoot opportunities where he could be replaced by Trey in that lineup situation fairly easily, and he's shooting fewer and fewer of them every year - 6.2 a game his first year in NOLA, 6.1 his second year, 4.1 his third, 3.6 last year.

So it's not like we're talking about exchanging someone who is a dynamite pullup 3 point guy who warps defenses on the regular with a complete non-factor. For both BI and Scoot, the midrange is where they generate most of their pull-up threat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

While I do not think the Pels will trade either BI or Zion this year, the only argument or justification I can see for trading BI (although I would not want to) is if they feel Trey can plug right into BI's role and avoid the bigger cap hit of a BI extension.

---

I think a serious argument also has to be made about upside. It's been said before by a bunch of people but I agree with it - BI reminds me a lot of deRozan.

An excellent player who, nonetheless, is actually pretty hard to use as the centerpiece of a championship level team but who, by virtue of being an excellent player, demands so much in terms of contract and roster tailoring that it makes it pretty difficult to actually build up that championship level team around him.

And similar to deRozan for the Raptors, I would only trade BI for a major change that I think puts us on the path to championship contention. I'm not talking about trading BI for scraps - he's way too good for that. But if you believe in Scoot, which I do, then go for it - just like the Raptors believed in Kawhi (who, at this point, had just sat out a year with huge controversy) and got a chip for it.

Stuff from Shamit's new post on the topic, much of which I agree with (though not all): https://intheno.substack.com/p/scooting-towards-a-deal

Quote:

---

Once the initial excitement settled, my first thought was that this is a leak from either Charlotte or Portland. It makes no strategic sense for the Pelicans to leak their interest in a top pick because it would indirectly be leaking their intention to move one of their stars. Draft season is peak disinformation season.

---

This is entirely true, and there's no disagreement there.

He then discusses moving Zion or BI a little bit, largely with the same arguments we've had here (though he does mention that he doesn't really believe in the ''locker room leader'' angle that is sometimes attached to BI, based on the team's continual search for other locker room leaders like CJ), before moving on to talk about Charlotte.

Quote:

---

All of the above discussion presupposes the Pelicans have an actual choice in the matter. There is a very real possibility Charlotte (Or Portland I guess) puts their foot down on ONE of the Pelicans two stars. In that event, I think the Pelicans should comply and trade the preferred player. I personally would be asking for more in return if Zion was in the trade than Ingram given the skill gap and contract situations, but I would still go through with the trade.

---

Talks then about the desire to acquire Hayward as this massive expiring which will potentially hold trade value later, or simply as flexibility insurance; also mentions that Charlotte might want to get off Rozier's contract, which is true and would be slightly concerning to me. We don't really need a Rozier type on this roster going forward, especially locked up for several years.

Quote:

---

There is a lot of concern among Pelicans fans that the team will take a step backwards by trading for a rookie. I am not convinced that is the case for a few reasons. Firstly, if Zion is not involved in the trade (or the trade doesn’t happen at all), then this team will be as good as Zion’s health. If Zion is healthy - they should be a very good team given what we saw last year. If Zion is not, then this team will be mediocre, trade or not.

Secondly, even if Zion is involved, the Pelicans would not be done dealing. Depending on the trade return, they would have the ability to pursue upgrades at the center position, as well as depth. For example - flipping Hayward’s expiring [...]

---

Pretty much agree with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Stuff from Shamit's new post on the topic, much of which I agree with (though not all): https://intheno.substack.com/p/scooting-towards-a-deal



This is entirely true, and there's no disagreement there.

He then discusses moving Zion or BI a little bit, largely with the same arguments we've had here (though he does mention that he doesn't really believe in the ''locker room leader'' angle that is sometimes attached to BI, based on the team's continual search for other locker room leaders like CJ), before moving on to talk about Charlotte.



Talks then about the desire to acquire Hayward as this massive expiring which will potentially hold trade value later, or simply as flexibility insurance; also mentions that Charlotte might want to get off Rozier's contract, which is true and would be slightly concerning to me. We don't really need a Rozier type on this roster going forward, especially locked up for several years.



Pretty much agree with that.

---

Yeah, if they were to insist on Rozier, the Pels would have to get a 3rd team involved. Lakers were rumored to be interested in him last year so may be able to get them to send Vanderbilt and Beasley back as they seemed to lose faith in them in the playoffs. Not excited about Hayward as not sure what value that contract would be as he is a shell of himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Yeah, if they were to insist on Rozier, the Pels would have to get a 3rd team involved. Lakers were rumored to be interested in him last year so may be able to get them to send Vanderbilt and Beasley back as they seemed to lose faith in them in the playoffs. Not excited about Hayward as not sure what value that contract would be as he is a shell of himself.

---

The value of Hayward is entirely in:

- Matching salary for whichever star goes there (since the real return is Scoot)
- Being a giant expiring who can either be normal expiring value for us (flexibility in future) or potentially broken up into more than one other player coming back in further moves

It's not really about Hayward himself as a player, he was fine in his day but he's clearly not that great now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

The value of Hayward is entirely in:

- Matching salary for whichever star goes there (since the real return is Scoot)
- Being a giant expiring who can either be normal expiring value for us (flexibility in future) or potentially broken up into more than one other player coming back in further moves

It's not really about Hayward himself as a player, he was fine in his day but he's clearly not that great now.

---

I get that, but $31m is a tough expiring to use. Taking him on along with Scoot's salary would make it difficult to avoid tax this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

I get that, but $31m is a tough expiring to use. Taking him on along with Scoot's salary would make it difficult to avoid tax this year.

---

There's some truth in that, I agree, but I'm not too concerned with dipping into the tax for a single year (though ownership may be, in fairness) and I also don't see that it would be necessary if we're making any other moves.

My assumption is that if Griff believes this team needs a significant enough change to make a trade of his scale, then he probably would have other more marginal moves on his mind as well, and those places are where you might be able to recoup some salary if you're truly concerned about the tax.

Assuming the trade only could happen if Brandon or Zion go out, then Hayward's incoming salary for next season is actually a bit of a discount on either of their contracts. So we would be in a slightly better position than we are today. Hayward would be a fine all around veteran and bench shooter for next year if we chose to hold on to him and then let his deal just go off the books...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

I actually think Scoot fits better with Zion than BI. He can get into the lane and take bodies with him and can also hit the mid range.

---

Are you describing Scoot or BI? Because BI's ability to warp defenses and attract bodies in one of the main reasons why he became a triple double threat later in the year. I don't understand why some people get blinders on when BI gets doubled and tripled as if it doesn't happen very often.

BI also gets to the rim and finishes, which he got back to doing more often last year after a year of being obscenely heavy on mid range jumpers the year before.

The only difference right now is we know BI can handle that pressure on an NBA level and is long enough to see over the top.

We have no idea how well Scoot will do on the NBA level, nor how long it will take him to adjust. He's not exactly the Chris Paul type lead guard either. And I'm actually on board if they could somehow land CP on a good, short, cheap deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

I get why some people have this emotional attachment to BI - and that this would mean that they aren't enthusiastic about trading him. But I'm not sure where that changes from ''reluctant'' to trade him, to ''refusing to ever'' trade him.

If he had led us on multiple deep playoff runs, or been on the team a decade, or had turned down money to be here, or something like that I think I could get it.

But this is a guy who ''committed'' to the team by signing an extension the same length that CJ did - and nobody cares about CJ like that.

He's won 2 playoff games with us, which is obviously great but it's hardly the stuff lifelong bonds are made of.

He's been here 4 years and in that time, the best we've been is 9th seed.

I get why, given the circumstances those wins happened in and the fact that he represents the success of the Brow trade, people would be reluctant to trade him but untouchable? Really?

---

It seems more like some people have an emotional attachment to Zion, whos been able to prove even less, since he just hasn't played much.

We know what BI looks like without both CJ and Zion. He had this team still competitive and even winning games before the CJ trade.

How does Zion look with this team in that same situation? Can he still impact the game if he can't force his way to the rim against a big team like the grizzlies?

The logic has less to do with emotion and more to do with what we know.

As far as Shamit (a well known BI hater not too long ago) I think he has the wrong idea of "leader" when it comes to BI in that locker room. He's not the guy that will address the entire group, or get on them about stretching, or guide them about off the court issues. That still a CJ, older vet type role. BI leads by example, get them together in off seasons, and can talk to them one-on-one.

Anybody that's played team sports or have had to a lot of things in groups knows there isn't one type of leader. But there would be very low morale if they decided to trade BI for a rookie like Scoot. That seems obvious to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

It seems more like some people have an emotional attachment to Zion, whos been able to prove even less, since he just hasn't played much.

We know what BI looks like without both CJ and Zion. He had this team still competitive and even winning games before the CJ trade.

How does Zion look with this team in that same situation? Can he still impact the game if he can't force his way to the rim against a big team like the grizzlies?

The logic has less to do with emotion and more to do with what we know.

---

You know, I might be more persuaded by this if people were saying that they would be reluctant to trade BI unless it was for something huge - that it's not the idea of a trade that turns them away, just the idea of this trade.

That sounds like what you might say if you were putting trust in something you know, but being logically open to whatever improves the team.

That's not what people are saying though. They're saying untouchable and what's more, they are telling us why they think that, and those reasons are emotional ones. You don't even have to leave this forum page to find someone saying he's untouchable because of 'the way he bought in' - an entirely emotional reason.

And don't get me wrong, I think emotional reasons are fine to have in sport, attachments happen, but you can't just pretend people aren't using them because it becomes inconvenient to you.

As for ''We know what BI looks like without CJ and Zion'' - I don't even think that's true.

First year he was here, we sucked.
Second year, Zion played 61/72 games, and we still sucked.
Third year, we made the 9th seed - our highest ranking since the Brow trade - and CJ was part of that.
This year, both Zion and CJ were on the team for at least part of the season, so again, we can't really say what the team looked like without them both, and also, we sucked.

Tell me where the ''still competitive and winning games'' bit happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

BI also gets to the rim and finishes, which he got back to doing more often last year after a year of being obscenely heavy on mid range jumpers the year before.

---

Brandon has shot about 14% of his shots at the rim every year for the last 3 years. Meanwhile, his short-midrange proportion has increased every single one of those years - from 22% in 2020-21 to 27.7% this year. His shot profile has simply gotten mid-heavier, if anything, especially since he's almost halved the number of 3s he takes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

That sounds like what you might say if you were putting trust in something you know, but being logically open to whatever improves the team.

---

I'm logically open to improving the team. Can we agree to start by investing in players who play games...say, more than 37% of them?

Seems to me, it would be illogical to believe a player improves the team by being in civies on game day more often than not.

I'm pretty sure that if the pelicans' interest is real and it got outed by one of Charlotte or Portland, it's precisely because they want to squeeze as much as possible and hope to have our FO to trade too much assets. So I would be surprised if so far they offered either BI or Williamson.

Also it could be a mean to apply pressure to another buyer since Pelicans are known to have multiple assets in the form if both young players and future draft picks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blattman

I'm pretty sure that if the pelicans' interest is real and it got outed by one of Charlotte or Portland, it's precisely because they want to squeeze as much as possible and hope to have our FO to trade too much assets. So I would be surprised if so far they offered either BI or Williamson.

Also it could be a mean to apply pressure to another buyer since Pelicans are known to have multiple assets in the form if both young players and future draft picks.

---

It might not even have anything to do with the Pels. It could just be trying to use us as leverage towards another team, since we're known to make deals around the draft and most people speculate we need to make some changes.

But yeah, if I were to guess I would assume it's an attempt to leverage us into bidding more - which makes sense from their perspective. If we are legitimately committed to acquiring Scoot, they have all the power. Would be stupid of them not to try and pry as much as they could out of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blattman

I'm pretty sure that if the pelicans' interest is real and it got outed by one of Charlotte or Portland, it's precisely because they want to squeeze as much as possible and hope to have our FO to trade too much assets. So I would be surprised if so far they offered either BI or Williamson.

Also it could be a mean to apply pressure to another buyer since Pelicans are known to have multiple assets in the form if both young players and future draft picks.

---

I'm of the belief that any trade that might happen would be much closer to the draft (if not during the draft). It would be foolish for either Portland or Charlotte to be in a hurry; they hold the cards. The longer they wait, the more the picks' values increases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

You know, I might be more persuaded by this if people were saying that they would be reluctant to trade BI unless it was for something huge - that it's not the idea of a trade that turns them away, just the idea of this trade.

That sounds like what you might say if you were putting trust in something you know, but being logically open to whatever improves the team.

That's not what people are saying though. They're saying untouchable and what's more, they are telling us why they think that, and those reasons are emotional ones. You don't even have to leave this forum page to find someone saying he's untouchable because of 'the way he bought in' - an entirely emotional reason.

And don't get me wrong, I think emotional reasons are fine to have in sport, attachments happen, but you can't just pretend people aren't using them because it becomes inconvenient to you.

As for ''We know what BI looks like without CJ and Zion'' - I don't even think that's true.

First year he was here, we sucked.
Second year, Zion played 61/72 games, and we still sucked.
Third year, we made the 9th seed - our highest ranking since the Brow trade - and CJ was part of that.
This year, both Zion and CJ were on the team for at least part of the season, so again, we can't really say what the team looked like without them both, and also, we sucked.

Tell me where the ''still competitive and winning games'' bit happened.

---

Okay cool. I'm not saying he's untouchable. I'm saying he's not going to be the first choice. Since I'm not on the internet like that I'm going by what I've seen on this site. Which is the only place I really talk pelicans basketball. And I keep seeing people assume they'd trade BI.

Also, we do know what this team looks like with BI as the sole top caliber player. 2 years ago he returned from injury and led this team to a .500 (or slightly winning) record from December of that year to the trade deadline. That was with Josh Hart as his main sidekick. No CJ and no Zion. That pretty obviously happened.

We don't have any sample of any size showing what would happen with Zion in that situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Brandon has shot about 14% of his shots at the rim every year for the last 3 years. Meanwhile, his short-midrange proportion has increased every single one of those years - from 22% in 2020-21 to 27.7% this year. His shot profile has simply gotten mid-heavier, if anything, especially since he's almost halved the number of 3s he takes.

---

Don't know where your stats come from, but according to nba.com, he's shot around 19% at the rim in the last 3 years, with his highest this year at 21%. Which jibes with what i saw on the floor. His low point at the rim was 2 years ago at 18%.

Even going back to stricter "restricted area" stats, he's still at 18% this year, which was the highest in the last 3 years. Was at 15% two seasons ago. His mid range was highest last year at 40% vs 35% this year.

Pretty sure I even posted about that 2 years ago and how that 40% from mid range was unsustainable and he needed to go back to attacking the rim. Which he did.