Givony: Minnesota, Chicago, Boston are looking to trade to #4 for Garland

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

I guess, but there is absolutely no reason to think Memphis are even interested in trading down. They've been locked on Morant for weeks, and literally just traded their franchise PG to make room for him. There's no way they move on from him for Garland unless you're throwing them a haul, and in the case that both Memphis AND NY want to rob you to move up, then don't even bother. Just stay at #4 and draft Culver if you love RJ that much. He's like RJ but with an active basketball IQ.

---

I’m with you, but if Memphis views garland even slightly close to Morant it’s possible

No way you make that move with Memphis with a division opponent who can rub it in your face eight plus times a year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Hayes is the superior rim protector at this point though, and Bitadze lacks the athleticism to play above the rim in any similar way. If you're after better defense, Hayes is the much better prospect, especially in today's NBA where bigs need to be able to guard down at least a little bit. Bitadze can't guard the perimeter at all.

---

I havent seen any scouting report describe Bitadze as below the rim or lacking athlesticism. As a matter of fact a few point out that one of his main assets is rim protection with blocked shots, which is rare in the euro league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

I havent seen any scouting report describe Bitadze as below the rim or lacking athlesticism. As a matter of fact a few point out that one of his main assets is rim protection with blocked shots, which is rare in the euro league.

---

You don't need to read scouting reports. Watch him. He gets a lot of blocks but it's almost entirely positioning, timing, and anticipation. Obviously that's still a good thing, but it's not a result of athleticism or above the rim play.

A trade sounds inevitable. I kinda want to keep this pick.

Trade scuttle: The Hawks and Cavs are discussing a trade that sends picks #8 and 10 to Cleveland.

It’s unclear what Atlanta would get in return.

— Ross (@LegionHoopsRoss) June 20, 2019

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

A trade sounds inevitable. I kinda want to keep this pick.

---

I want to keep the pick and draft garland / BPA. We would have to be blown away by a deal in order for me to feel comfortable trading it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by honet4life

---

I feel like if this deal goes through then we aren't moving #4 considering Hawks probably had the most intriguing offer without us having to give up additional assets. Also a deal with them would likely get Hill off our books.

What is the fixation with people still worried about getting Hill off the books NOW? He's an expiring. He'll be gone after the season. It makes no sense to waste an asset when he'll have value at the deadline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobertM320

What is the fixation with people still worried about getting Hill off the books NOW? He's an expiring. He'll be gone after the season. It makes no sense to waste an asset when he'll have value at the deadline.

---

The deal wouldn't be made TO get Hill off the books, it would be for other assets while getting rid of Hill. Do the math, we could sign a nice FA or a couple of solid 2nd teir guys with the space we could create by getting some contracts off the books.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

If Barrett falls to 4 you tell the hawks sorry no trade, if it’s garland at 4 I make that trade all day and get 2 players at 8 and 10 that are just as good as garland

---

Agree

I am liking the idea of #4 and Hill for #11, Covington, and Saric. We could then draft Hayes or Biatze at 11. We also could trade Moore into someone’s cap space and make a run at Vucevic in FA.

PG: Ball/Payton/Jackson
SG: Holiday/Hart
SF: Ingram/Covington/Williams
PF: Williamson/Saric/Wood
C: Vucevic/Hayes/Okafor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

The deal wouldn't be made TO get Hill off the books, it would be for other assets while getting rid of Hill. Do the math, we could sign a nice FA or a couple of solid 2nd teir guys with the space we could create by getting some contracts off the books.

---

But you're selling low and buying high. At the deadline Hill's value will be higher and any players available at the deadline from teams that realize their season is over will be lower. Again, there's no rush to try and completely build the roster into a contender in ONE offseason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobertM320

But you're selling low and buying high. At the deadline Hill's value will be higher and any players available at the deadline from teams that realize their season is over will be lower. Again, there's no rush to try and completely build the roster into a contender in ONE offseason.

---

But if his salary is needed now in a trade for a valuable asset, you do it now instead of paying him to occupy the bench just in case a trade comes up later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobertM320

But you're selling low and buying high. At the deadline Hill's value will be higher and any players available at the deadline from teams that realize their season is over will be lower. Again, there's no rush to try and completely build the roster into a contender in ONE offseason.

---

Do not comprehend bolded. Hill has no value. Expiring contracts are not worth what they used to be 5 years ago especially for a trash player. If 8 & 10 straight up for 4 is available, and we ask them to take Hill in that deal and they comply, what is the harm in that? Just because we get Hill off the books doesn't mean we have to immediately use the space. He isn't a part of the future and he should get 0 minutes per game - if we can move him I'm all for it. Not a deal breaker but it would be nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

Do not comprehend bolded. Hill has no value. Expiring contracts are not worth what they used to be 5 years ago especially for a trash player. If 8 & 10 straight up for 4 is available, and we ask them to take Hill in that deal and they comply, what is the harm in that? Just because we get Hill off the books doesn't mean we have to immediately use the space. He isn't a part of the future and he should get 0 minutes per game - if we can move him I'm all for it. Not a deal breaker but it would be nice.

---

Didn't say there was harm in that. All I'm saying is at this point his contract is not the albatross that Asik's was, yet people are acting as if we're hard up in luxury tax land and must move Hill at all costs. And since he's that useless, I doubt any other team is going to want to fill up their cap space with him either. If we can move him, fine. If not, its not a big deal.

That salary could make the difference in signing a potential FA come June 30.

Covington alone plus #11 is not worth the trade up to #4. We need Saric as well or no deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkhorse985

Covington alone plus #11 is not worth the trade up to #4. We need Saric as well or no deal.

---

Absolutley! Either that trade or a trade that brings in Turner from Pacers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobertM320

What is the fixation with people still worried about getting Hill off the books NOW? He's an expiring. He'll be gone after the season. It makes no sense to waste an asset when he'll have value at the deadline.

---

Because that contract was a disaster from the start. Expiring or not, you get rid of him and you don't look back.

i want picks 8 and 10. Jaxson Hayes and either rui hachamura or cam reddish (steal/ better than RJ)

if we were to trade with the wolves and could actually grab wiggins we would HAVE to. He needs a change of scenery to blossom. By blossom i mean mature in his understanding of the game. He could still be very good.... although he's been terrible thus far. he is very talented

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kinglio21093

Because that contract was a disaster from the start. Expiring or not, you get rid of him and you don't look back.

---

I'm not disagreeing it would be nice to get rid of. However, you still haven't explained WHY the Hawks would do it. Giving up #8 AND #10 is more than enough for #4, I don't see them taking back Hill as well. If people are going to suggest trades, they need to make sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobertM320

I'm not disagreeing it would be nice to get rid of. However, you still haven't explained WHY the Hawks would do it. Giving up #8 AND #10 is more than enough for #4, I don't see them taking back Hill as well. If people are going to suggest trades, they need to make sense.

---

Why they do it??? LOL they want 4, badly. THey say hey we want 4, you can have 8 and 10, and we say OK but you have to take Hill. I don't think 8 and 10 makes a lot of sense for 4, so them having to take Hill seems reasonable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fullcourtpress

i want picks 8 and 10. Jaxson Hayes and either rui hachamura or cam reddish (steal/ better than RJ)

if we were to trade with the wolves and could actually grab wiggins we would HAVE to. He needs a change of scenery to blossom. By blossom i mean mature in his understanding of the game. He could still be very good.... although he's been terrible thus far. he is very talented

---

So you like Hachimura, Reddish, and Wiggins?

Gotcha.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

So you like Hachimura, Reddish, and Wiggins?

Gotcha.

---

Not a fan of Reddish but I have to say that I love Rui.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

Not a fan of Reddish but I have to say that I love Rui.

---

The single most confusing part of this entire draft to me is how much some people love Rui. I don't like Reddish, but I can at least see why some people do: he's got the size, his shooting looks good in the gym and in workouts, he has the perfect defensive build for a lengthy modern wing, etc. He's not there, but there's at least the potential, physically and in isolation.

Rui just baffles me. He may be the worst passer in this draft. He has negative feel for the game, just absolutely nothing at all. His defense is abominable. People brag about how he runs the floor like a gazelle, and that's true, but he also reads the game like a gazelle, and interprets defenses like a gazelle. Two of the things I look for above anything else in prospects are IQ and feel, and he just has absolutely none of either.

But some people absolutely love him. Confusing.

Trading down for Covington or Saric is usless in my opinion.
Saric plays 4 and we need to develop Zion.
Covington plays 3 and we need to develop Ingram.
Depth would be nice but talent level from 4 to 11 is not worth it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

The single most confusing part of this entire draft to me is how much some people love Rui. I don't like Reddish, but I can at least see why some people do: he's got the size, his shooting looks good in the gym and in workouts, he has the perfect defensive build for a lengthy modern wing, etc. He's not there, but there's at least the potential, physically and in isolation.

Rui just baffles me. He may be the worst passer in this draft. He has negative feel for the game, just absolutely nothing at all. His defense is abominable. People brag about how he runs the floor like a gazelle, and that's true, but he also reads the game like a gazelle, and interprets defenses like a gazelle. Two of the things I look for above anything else in prospects are IQ and feel, and he just has absolutely none of either.

But some people absolutely love him. Confusing.

---

You must be looking at a different player, this doesn't describe Rui at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

You must be looking at a different player, this doesn't describe Rui at all.

---

I'm talking about the one who played for Gonzaga. You know, the one who was the second best player on his own team, after Clarke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

I'm talking about the one who played for Gonzaga. You know, the one who was the second best player on his own team, after Clarke.

---

Watch his “highlights” and you see how limited his offensive game is. The scary part though is that he doesn’t seem to know what to do in the paint. Lots of ineffective head fakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

I'm talking about the one who played for Gonzaga. You know, the one who was the second best player on his own team, after Clarke.

---

This convo is over because now I know you're just hating. 20ppg 6.5rpg 1.5apg 1spg 59% from the field and 42% from 3 is garbage, you're right I have no idea what people see in him. Defense is abominable?? No IQ? I must have watched more Gonzaga games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

This convo is over because now I know you're just hating. 20ppg 6.5rpg 1.5apg 1spg 59% from the field and 42% from 3 is garbage, you're right I have no idea what people see in him. Defense is abominable?? No IQ? I must have watched more Gonzaga games.

---

If your argument essentially boils down to saying ''Oh yeah well, you just didn't watch him enough'', then that pretty much sums up your point.

I don't deny that Rui is a good paint scorer (although again, not as good as Clarke, his teammate). My point was that he's a poor passer, reads the floor poorly, has poor feel for the game, and is a horrible defender. Your counterargument was essentially ''Uhhhhh, 20ppg! No IQ? Nuh-uh!''. Sorry if that doesn't inspire confidence in me.

We need to trade up to get either Morvant or Barrett whatever it takes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

If your argument essentially boils down to saying ''Oh yeah well, you just didn't watch him enough'', then that pretty much sums up your point.

I don't deny that Rui is a good paint scorer (although again, not as good as Clarke, his teammate). My point was that he's a poor passer, reads the floor poorly, has poor feel for the game, and is a horrible defender. Your counterargument was essentially ''Uhhhhh, 20ppg! No IQ? Nuh-uh!''. Sorry if that doesn't inspire confidence in me.

---

Not really I'm just trying to figure out if you actually watched anything other than a youtube video to make your assessment.

You said he was below average at basically everything. I supported facts that disprove that. I have watched maybe only 4-5 full games this year but kept up with him as a player and while I'm not saying he is going to lock anyone down in the NBA , i don't believe horrible is justified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

Not really I'm just trying to figure out if you actually watched anything other than a youtube video to make your assessment.

You said he was below average at basically everything. I supported facts that disprove that. I have watched maybe only 4-5 full games this year but kept up with him as a player and while I'm not saying he is going to lock anyone down in the NBA , i don't believe horrible is justified.

---

No I didn't. I said he might be the worst passer in the draft, that his defense is extremely bad, and that his feel sucks. All of that is true. He is a good inside scorer, and a decent rebounder.

If I wanted to say he was below average at basically everything, I would say that. But that's not what I wanted to say, so I didn't say it.

I watched about the same number of Gonzaga games as you this year, if you watched about 5, and I'm pretty confident in my evaluation. Hachimura is not worth a top 15 pick, in my opinion, and I think he will prove that in the NBA. If I wanted to draft a Gonzaga player in the top 10, it would definitely be Clarke, who is just a much better basketball player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

So you like Hachimura, Reddish, and Wiggins?

Gotcha.

---

Not a fan of any of those. I think Reddish could be good, but the one thing that keeps coming up with him is his motor and whether he wants to put in the work. That is a red flag.

Knicks Willing To Trade Frank Ntilikina For 2nd Round Pick https://t.co/ridC2ugLSb

— RealGM (@RealGM) June 20, 2019