I'd give up Lonzo and 42 to get Hayes. Would be reluctant to give up 42 as well, honestly, as petty as it sounds (and I know it sounds petty).Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara
Would absolutely not do so for Haliburton.
 |
| . |
|
I'd give up Lonzo and 42 to get Hayes. Would be reluctant to give up 42 as well, honestly, as petty as it sounds (and I know it sounds petty).
Would absolutely not do so for Haliburton.
Basketball.
Haliburton will be seen as one of the best leaders in the league in 5 years - thats my prediction. And I see no leadership in Ingram or Lonzo. I can pick apart some of Haliburton's game (I hate that he doesnt get to the line, for instance) but I think this team needs leadership and a culture and those guys are hard to find. I am willing to bet that Haliburton is THE leader to come out of this draft. I'd happily give up picks for that. And to me, getting rid of Lonzo is just an added bonus
@mcnamara247
Well, I agree with that statement about Ingram and Lonzo (best be careful: whenever I say anything critical about Ingram someone crawls out of the woodwork to cry about me picking on him).
I think ultimately, mentality hits a wall when the skill is simply insufficient. Take someone like Pat Beverley: I absolutely believe that he cares, nobody is more vocal than him, he's seems to hate losing and isn't afraid to tell anyone, etc. None of it matters because he's just not an effective NBA player in several key ways, and as a result he's nothing more than a decent roleplayer depending on team context.
As well, I think it also depends what I think Lonzo's market is. If I have good reason to suspect that Lonzo has no market value, then I guess you can just look at it as a pure pick trade and see losing Lonzo as a free positive that costs you nothing. But if I have any reason to suspect that Lonzo has value as a tradeable asset on his own, then giving him up as a freebie would just be bad value.
That's something I have no real insight into, but you would expect Griff and the rest of the front office would know.
Just a reminder, because it crossed my Twitter timeline, of pre-college sample sizes in offensive efficiency.
Here's the TS% of various bigs in this class and last year from their EYBL sample.
Onyeka Okongwu: 75.9%
Bol Bol: 73.8%
Isaiah Stewart: 60.5%
James Wiseman: 52.7%
Shooting sub-55% TS at any pre-college level is a really poor sign for bigs moving into the NBA. It's really hard to excuse unless they're exceptionally young for their class or if they started basketball extremely late or something. Then there tends to be more leeway.
It was better in college but then, Wiseman only played 3 games in college, and all of them against not-great teams iirc.
'KOC says the Pelicans are a team looking to move up in the draft.
— Kevin Barrios (@kevinbforbounce) November 3, 2020
Jrue, JJ, Lonzo must be on the table
You rang permanent Ingram shader?Well, I agree with that statement about Ingram and Lonzo (best be careful: whenever I say anything critical about Ingram someone crawls out of the woodwork to cry about me picking on him
I broached the idea of using a package to move up to get Hayes about a month ago... and was met with a bunch of "NO". Now it's and idea?
This draft has people changing with every breeze
His methodical pace worries me. He can of course get the skill level needed to play at that speed, but he might not.
I'd rather go after that speed demon.
Not every PG needs to be Ja MorantI broached the idea of using a package to move up to get Hayes about a month ago... and was met with a bunch of "NO". Now it's and idea?
This draft has people changing with every breeze
His methodical pace worries me. He can of course get the skill level needed to play at that speed, but he might not.
I'd rather go after that speed demon.
Hayes reminds me a bit of Conley and that's fine
This draft is too unpredictable to me. Hayes seems like a boom or bust type (as are many at the top). I could see the Pels looking to move up for a player like Williams.
I don't see Hayes as boom/bust at all. He's as safe a prospect as you ever really get in the draft: I'm absolutely confident that, even at his floor, he will be a competent NBA player for the next decade. Whether that's as a starter or backup depends on various factors, but he's not going to 'bust' in that, I very much doubt he flames out of the league.
For me, trading up for him all depends on what the package is. This is not a high value draft. I would be extremely reluctant to move up to get anyone if it meant giving significant assets.
Now, if it's a case of, say, Detroit being willing to take Lonzo and 13 for 7 (or some variation of that) then sure, I'd be interested. If they wanted Lonzo and 13 and a 2021 FRP (even heavily protected) then I'm far less interested.
It all depends on the deal. I like Hayes a lot, I think he's going to be a good NBA player for some time, but the likelihood of him being a superstar is fairly small (as is true for everyone in this draft, hence the general disdain for it) and therefore you have to be careful that you're not giving up superstar value for him.
It's just not worth giving up assets to move up 3 spots in this draft, unless it only took Miller or Jackson or something
Why are you saying 3 spots? This draft is so unpredictable, who knows where teams project the players?
So, you wouldnt have given up assets if you could go back in time and get Herro instead of NAW?
If you LOVE a guy, it is the absolute best time to trade assets for a player IMO. You get him in your organization from the beginning of his career. He grows with you and your new coach and GM who each have 4 years on their new deals. You choose the right guy and he is a foundation piece that grows with your organization.
How much would you give up to go from 10 to 6 in 2012 when we drafted Rivers, and could have had Lillard? Or heck, in 2010 we had the 11th pick and Paul George went #10. We gave up our 2011 first for Jerryd Bayless a few months later. Would you rather have Cole Aldrich and Bayless or George?
If you LOVE a guy and think he will be a core piece for you and you are pretty sure he wont be there when you pick, go be aggressive. What was the point of getting all these picks if we arent going to use them for guys we think can be core pieces?
Stockpile them for when the next disgruntled star becomes available
You are talking to the guy who started that movement. But my point is that if you believe in a guy so much so that you think he will become a star with your core, you give up an asset now to go get him. Lets say we give up 13 and next years 1st to move up to 7 to get our guy.... we still have all the Lakers picks, all our picks and everything we might get in Jrue trade and/or a JJ trade at the deadline.
Also, if you look at a lot of the future stars who might eventually ask out....several are in the West and historically those guys get traded to the opposite conference and/or a large market. I like stocking up the war chest for core pieces, but my point is that if you are very confident you identified a core piece in this draft, you can actually get him cheaper than if you try to go get a core piece star. You could never get a star for 13 and say the 18th pick next year. But if you identify the 'next star' in this draft, you can by being aggressive and getting him now
I think Vassell and Okungwu will be very good players maybe not star but not busts. I think Okungwu could be like Tristan Thompson and Vassell a cross between Bridges and Malik Beasley. Please let us come out of this draft with these 2 guys. The core of Vassell, BI, Zion, and Okungwu will be great.
His name is Okongwu.
Wonder if we are trading up for Vassel or Patrick Williams if we do trade up
I think SVG is gonna play Zion at center a lot especially against smaller ones, Patrick Williams would be the perfect PF next to him, can run with him, defend and space the floor
Last edited by HornetGuru; 11-03-2020 at 07:30 PM.
I if was gonna move up for a PG, I'd move up a few spots for Halliburton instead of a larger move for Hayes. Assuming they get picked according to consensus.
Any combination of Lewis, Hayes, or Halliburton might still be there at 13. Who the hell knows.
Kira would probably still be there, the other two I think are likely to be gone.
Honestly, I would vastly prefer Kira to Hali anyway: I think he has a much clearer and more realistic path to NBA impact.
If you are gonna move up, you dont do it as a 'value buy' IMO
By that, I mean that if you are the Pels and you are giving up assets for players, your goal is to get long term core pieces. Not to get good, solid players. So, go get the guy you believe in the most and pay what it costs, even if it is an overpay. Because if you get your big three, filling around them is the easy part. The hard part is getting the 3rd big guy. So, if you think Hayes is 15% better, but costs 20% more - you go get him.
My buddy in the league told me about a week ago that the worst kept secret in the league is that the Suns are taking Kira at 10. The guy I think we should discuss more is Terry at 13. He is the PG most likely to go in our range
Tyrell Terry? Not sure I'd take him quite that high. I like him, but if he was on the board at the same time as someone like Maxey, I'd take Maxey first. Terry is decent though, he wouldn't be a disastrous pick or anything.
Some of y'all want to hoard these late 1st/2nd round picks. If the Pels see a guy they want, make those things rain! In a draft like this, guys might be rated close to eachother, but if you value a player higher than the rest, go get them.
Good positive energy.
But also, yo mama's fat.
I think we have to start looking into the 2021 draft. Its the huge chip Golden State can throw us. I have 7 guys right now who I'd probably take ahead if anyone in the 2020 draft. Imagine the Warriors offering us the first AND second pick in this draft --- thats kind of the value I think we are getting if that Minny pick lands around 5 or 6 next year
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote