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.