| . |
 |
Those people are reacting to a poor recap of what Woj said on a recent pod. The recap tweet left out the part where Woj said something good would come back to the PelsOriginally Posted by Pelicanidae
They are not using 10 to dump him. Theyare attaching him to 10 and something of quality will come back. Or they will just move 10 w/o Bledsoe and move Bled at another time
@mcnamara247
NBA Central
@TheNBACentral
?
32m
The Pelicans have 'generated traction' with the Grizzlies in a deal that would send the 10th pick and Eric Bledsoe to Memphis for the Grizzlies' 17th pick, per
@JakeLFischer
Meh. I guess this is ok if we are opening up room for Lowry.
So we are moving the 10th pick and a partially guaranteed player to move back 7 picks? There obviously has to be more to this, or else this is just ******** poor management.
If you Jimmer it, they will come.
Lmao relax. 10 through 17 in this draft is not a huge difference. Contract isn?t partially guaranteed until 2022 anyway.
Watch the next shoe to drop will be Adams and 17 for a Lowry sign and trade, 3 years $75 million.
Yeah that's not the point.
Asset management is asset management. Making smart moves that are careful on the margins is important, especially when you're trying to take that step up towards contendership. Small mistakes you've made in the past can come back to haunt you.
Now, I'm not saying this mistake would haunt us, but it's just bad practice. There's an argument - whether you personally think it's a strong one or not is besides the point - that due to his expiring contract, the presence of his Bird Rights, and his history of play that Bledsoe may even be a mild positive asset for a good team (one where he'd be motivated to play hard, that is). Taking a step down in the draft to dump someone who is arguably an asset is poor asset management, whatever else may also be true.
And that's regardless of whether you think there's a real step down between 10 and 17 in this draft, which I think there could be depending on a few variable guys whose names float around a bit.
Basketball.
The Kings, who hold the No. 9 pick in Thursday’s draft, may be the highest option for teams hoping to trade into the lottery. Sacramento and the Pelicans, who have the 10th selection, have been active in trade talks involving those picks, sources tell Fischer, as both teams are looking for veterans who will give them a better chance to make the playoffs next season. New Orleans, which is hoping to unload Eric Bledsoe‘s salary, has talked to the Grizzlies about a deal that would send the veteran guard and the lottery pick to Memphis in exchange for the 17th choice....Arthur Hill
Why? If this is true, I'm appalled...... "Here, we'll let you move up seven picks in the draft, Memphis and you can have Bledsoe, too". In other words, "Kick Me!!!"
10 to 17 in ANY draft is a huge difference.
Have Bledsoe too? The idea is to get off of Bledsoe. He is not an asset. Having said that, 10 to 17 is a pretty steep draft that would normally cost teams a good bit to move up.
An aside...
Evan Fournier and Rudy Gobert lead the French past 'Pop's Pansies', 83-76. Jrue Holiday led the American Team with 18/7/4 off the bench.
Contributor
Something else has to be coming too? Bledsoe and the 10th out. Tyus Jones in? Valanciunas?
Like of all the draft assets we obtained when acquiring Bledsoe?
Yes, asset management and the fringes are important. One moment you have a war chest to send Christopher Columbus across the ocean to the new world, the next your on the corner begging for change to cross the street and get a Subway sandwich.
The point is, there has to be a second move dependent on that first move happening, or else Griff is just wizzing away assets we accumulated in the AD/Jrue trades. Don’t wizz away those assets or all you are left with is your wang in your hand and stories of what could have been if you had planned things better.
He is an asset; he has a value. Might not be to this team, but make no mistake, he has a value.
Remember, one man's trash is another man's treasure. (See Solomon Hill)
Last edited by As I See It; 07-25-2021 at 01:30 PM.
So we get rid of Bledsoe which is nice, but I'm not too crazy about going that far down.
Cleaning his mess with more mess
Memphis better be sending something else back with the 17th pick. I don't care if a second move is contingent on the first, if that first move sucks. 10 and Bledsoe for 17, in a vacuum, is terrible management from the FO.
Dude. We had to use an asset to dump Hill. Bledsoe is not an asset. Woj said himself he is not viewed as an asset.
the teams picking 13, 14, 16 (and 18), and 19 (and 21) all have interest in moving up to 10 too. Griff is gonna get value for trading down
Dude. You're wrong. Does he have a positive value? The answer is a resounding yes. Might not be the value you like; but he has a value.
And by the way, I don't want him on my team either.
I'd keep Bledsoe on the bench for a year and then eat the 3MM buyout rather than being suckered into this silly trade. If I'm trading 10, it will be for something of like or better value.
Last edited by As I See It; 07-25-2021 at 02:29 PM.
What is your definition of 'positive value'?
Because by the standard definition, I dont think anybody on earth (including the 30 GMs) would agree
Easiest way to determine a guys value (positive or negative) is to look at his current contract and ask if he would get the same, more, or less on the open market.
If Bledsoe was a FA this offseason, he might get some offers in the 2/10-12 range. Maybe.
He will make 18 mil next season, and basically have 3 mil in dead money after that. Basically, making him a 1 yr/21 mil contract. That would make him a negative asset, by almost any definition. Adams, similarly is a slight negative asset, as there is no universe where he could get 2/35 this offseason
He wouldn't be in the NBA if someone (Milwaukee) didn't value him in the first place. Most act like he's garbage; I disagree. He's a malcontent with an attitude that never wanted to be here. Get rid of him, but as filler or some other means. I'm not tying a lottery pick to him to get rid of his behind with a negative return coming back to us. That would be compounding a negative.
Last edited by As I See It; 07-25-2021 at 02:38 PM.
There are currently 12 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 12 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote