| . |
 |
A pick 8-30 and denver will still be good in 2023 so it'll be in the 20's and 2nd rounders "usually" don't have much value. So us "chucking" them around will nilly is an overstatement. Now if we given away 2 1st rounders for Adams, then it would be a completely different conversation. We still have ALL the assets from our 2 biggest trades from AD and Jrue. So as long as we aren't careless with those, I'm cool.Originally Posted by AusPel
I'm almost certain there will be at least 1 more move to be done.
Nah it's pretty much it apart from one more guy who might make you sit up and take notice. Then the rest minimums basically
There has to be at least something more: our deal for Adams doesn't actually quite work under the cap yet, we have to move someone else. Doesn't really matter who because it's only like $2m that has to be made up I think, but someone's gotta go.
Then you have to imagine we're gonna use the MLE to sign someone on the wing.
Basketball.
My guess is a S&T with one of our UFA to make up the shortfall
Take one for the team Frank!
I'm admittedly a bit slow when it comes to NBA cap stuff and it usually takes people making posts explaining what's up for me to wrap my brain around it but I don't get the Asik deal comparisons. The Omer deal panned out to be bad because of how long term it was. Adams is on an expiring. Can't get any more opposite than that. And one thing I do know from observing cap guys is that expiring contracts make them super moist.
Good positive energy.
But also, yo mama's fat.
Or Kenny. Prefer Frank though
Similarities:
- Both centres we traded for on expiring contracts
- Neither stretched the floor
- Both good rebounders
- Both filled a need
That's about where the similarities end really. Adams is a vastly more talented, assertive and co-ordinated player.
Some people are worried about us overpaying again (and over-committing with the length like you said, which is arguably more damaging), if we re-sign Adams. Not just over-committing in terms of short and long term output, but whether you want to tie up 15-20 mil in the centre position, probably the last place you want direct a large chunk of capital (unless your name is Nikola Jokic)
Last edited by AusPel; 11-21-2020 at 02:41 PM.
It?s definitely better than the Asik deal. We have so many assets to sit on and Adams is expiring (and a much better player). We can technically afford to take a gamble here.
Last edited by JJackisangry; 11-21-2020 at 02:37 PM.
I don't think it's really an overpay at all unless you think it's guaranteed that Hill will get back another 1st round pick and that Adams is a horrible fit even as a 1 year rental. At some point, it's actually not good to have too many first round picks. People overvalue them probably in part due to their value in other sports... but not so much in the NBA outside of the top few picks, and you need veterans on the team to help the current young players grow.
Also, Eric Bledsoe's deal isn't that bad. It's 3/54.4, but the final year only 3.9m of 19.4m is guaranteed. So it's really 2/35 with 3.9m in the third year. Could be good value for a trade at that point for a team looking to shed contracts.
Also doesn't seem that bad at all when compared to what current free agents are getting... Jordan Clarkson 4/52, Marcus Morris 4/64, Jerami Grant 3/60, Gordan Hayward 4/120, Fred VanVleet 4/84.
Last edited by bradael; 11-21-2020 at 02:42 PM.
I can see you're not someone who's firmly bought into the Sam Presti Philosophy of Draft Capital Accumulation
Would you also mind elaborating on your unconventional 'more is less' approach to draft pick valuation and management? Cheers!
Last edited by AusPel; 11-21-2020 at 02:53 PM.
I don’t think Bledsoe’s contract is so bad in the sense that he is a poor player. I question his fit, his attitude and the circumstance he comes into. We drafted a very promising Kira Lewis jr. Rather than bury him in the rotation, we should put him in situation where he can learn on the go. Bledsoe is not a long term piece. I don’t think we are quite ready to compete either. We trade Bledsoe for Adams and we get that added veteran presence while shedding his salary. I don’t think we should have both.
If we could of traded Bledsoe for Adam we would. They didn't want Bledsoe without more compensation.
Then we shouldn’t have made the deal. If our goal was to shed salary, all we’d need to do is find an expiring for Hill. We chose Adams. It is what it is.
The goals may have shifted along the way, you never know
Who knows. At least the team will be enjoyable this year. And I don?t think the FO is so shortsighted that they?d trade picks for a rental. I suspect we aren?t done yet.
I don't know if you haven't watched last year, but we was one of the worst defense at protecting the paint. Adams helps a lot with that and it's a cultural move too.
I don't think it's all or nothing: either you try to make a team that will win now or send all talent away to tank for picks. There is room for the Pelicans in the middle of those extremes.
A team with Ingram and healthy Zion is never going to be a bottom 3-5 team. And with the trades of Holiday and Davis, the team has future assets already. So I see no problem in acquiring veterans, seeing if you can get to the 7th seed, and not sacrificing that much future flexibility. Then you see what players fit and don't fit and make decisions after.
I love Adams, but we said the same thing about Favors and Jrue bringing “defense and veteran presence.” Lot of good that did us. If we are better defensively, yes Adams will be a big factor in the paint. But a head coaching change should be massive too.
The problem is that defense is a team thing. You can't one-man a defense.
Jrue was a really good 1-v-1 defender last year. So was Favors. But Favors spent huge chunks of the year out, and the defense as a team never really came together for a variety of reasons, so you were left with Jrue leading the league in deflections and being one of the highest in guard contests and being top 10 in loose balls collected, and Favors holding people well under their averages and boxing out like a madman, and it meant nothing because the team defense just didn't exist.
That's something that needs to change, and it's a culture thing as much as anything else. SVG should help there, for sure.
I don’t blame Jrue one bit. Gentry and his staff were godawful on that side of the ball. We somehow managed to be one of the best rebounding teams in the league (I think) while looking like one of the worst rebounding teams in the league. We’d give up open cuts, looks, rebounds and everything on the spectrum. We’d mark invisible space constantly. Jrue wasn’t even a factor because we were sliced through like Swiss.
Part of it was personnel, in fairness. For large parts of the year, several players seemed either entirely disinterested in defense, or to actively have something against it. Lonzo took a huge step back on defense from when he was in LA. Ingram did not take the step on defense that he did on offense. Redick hasn't been a positive defender for a good while now. Jax improved as the year went on, but he was still an inexperienced rookie and it showed. When Zion returned, he was clearly a step slow and I think also quite hesitant to really go for it, which meant his defense was pretty poor too.
We had Jrue, who was really good 1v1 but did take a step back as a team defender, Favors who spent most of the year either injured or recovering from injury such that his mobility was slashed, Kenrich who barely played, and Hart who was quite good but also massively undersized for the guys he ended up guarding. That's about it. That's not enough for a good team defense.
Sacrilegious, I'm sure, but team defense improved measurably (record too) when Melli became a major piece of the rotation. JAX was God-awful, save for the one highlight play every third game.
It’s a combination of factors, but it certainly can’t get any worse than it was last season. I’d hope
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote