We could take a bad contract like prince back and I’m open to other options like maybe lakers pick too.Originally Posted by HornetGuru
 |
| . |
|
We could take a bad contract like prince back and I’m open to other options like maybe lakers pick too.
Bumping this thread because trading down was always more likely than staying at 10. Getting more picks and getting off contracts, etc is more valuable to Griff than taking a shot at someone at #10. It has always been Plan B if quality vets werent available. And right now, they arent
@mcnamara247
I think we're all fine with trading out of 10 for future assets
It's the big brain play
And Griff is trying. The goal, more than getting off Bledsoe, is to leave Thursday night with more future picks than they have right now
That's amazing for me
And it shows that Griff isn't completely incompetent at his job
What's the benefit of trading Bledsoe before season then?
If they are making small moves and likely making the homerun move at the trade deadline, (which I agree with) why not trade down for more assets (players) than using to move down just get rid of Bleds contract? He will be worth more in Feb than in October.
Must be a FA they want to sign with cap space or they want Bleds minutes given to NAW and Lewis.
Last edited by AUSSIE_PELICAN; 07-26-2021 at 05:28 AM.
Or they don't see moving down 5-7 spots to free up cap space and minutes for the future guards a sacrifice.
You have just figured out why they arent as desperate to get off Bledsoe as the media is portraying. Griff is not gonna pay to get off him like many are making it seem. He would rather not bring him into camp and would rather have two starting guards he likes, but he is not going to do whatever it takes to dump him. Give up a little to dump him or swap him out for another expiring like Taurean Prince, sure. But move back 7 spots just to dump him? Aint gonna happen unless they already have a deal worked out with CP3 or Lowry (unlikely)
How do people feel, in general, about doing whatever we do in the draft (likely trade down), but not attaching Bledsoe - then doing Bledsoe + a Hart sign and trade for Kevin Love?
Love's contract is 31.2 mil this year and 28.9 mil next year. Terrible, sure - but if he gives you 60-65 games this year, he provides good value and fit plus he becomes the expiring next summer if a guy comes available.
Are there plenty of negatives? Sure. But you gotta buy low in this market. If you are just going for guys who have been good lately, you will have to pay a ton for them. I still am of the belief that if you take Love out of a putrid situation he will be revitalized a la Blake and give you value
I would pass. Him giving you 60-65 games is not likely given his recent history. He turns 33 in about a month and his body appears to be breaking down.
And my question is: Would you have passed on Blake, D Rose, Batum, and Reggie Jackson? Most likely, right?
Now, I get that Love's price tag is bigger but you arent going to get the guys I mentioned for the min because if they get bought out, they are going to a coastal team and a contender. But putting price tag aside, if you get one of those players for nothing and then they start caring again and play up to their pedigree, it is the kind of value add that takes your team to a new level while keeping all your assets.
If not Love, you gotta bet on someone IMO. Cant just say, "Lets go get a bunch of guys who have been good recently" because that will burn your assets
I think this would be a good strategy. Cleveland would give you an asset to get off of Love contact. I wouldn’t have a problem with it.
Apples and oranges. As you mentioned, paying near league minimum or $60 million over 2 years is a huge difference and would have a significant impact on my decision. Love for league minimum or close to it, certainly. $60 million? Pass. There is a big difference between a low risk move and only "looking for a guy who has been good recently." I would be worried that they would be just compounding one bad decision with potentially an even worse one.
I don’t get your love affair with Love . The guy is injury prone. He kills our flexibility as a team for 2 years as another bad contract. Imagine the defensive nightmare with Zion, Love, and Adams on the floor together. If you argue that he should play a 6th man role, then is that the best way to spend $30 million of our cap?
At that price, Kevin Love would be a gamble I might be willing to take. Bear in mind, that our front court would primarily consist of Zion, Adams, Ingram, Love, and JAX (barring other moves). None of them are capable defenders on the perimeter and some suggest that, as a group. none can defend at all (quick, call Naji) Also, over the last five seasons, Love has averaged just over 44 games played per season and has not played more than 60 games in a season since '15/'16. On the other hand, as you infer, Blake Griffin did rejuvenate his injury-plagued career by accepting an tertiary role in Brooklyn; perhaps an ancillary role in NOLA would do the same for the 'Beach Boy'.
I have no love affair with Love. I have a love affair with buying low. As for the contract, I am getting rid of Bledsoe too and rolling over a contract so I have a big expiring next summer
My thesis is that we wont have a chance to get THE big piece this year. Next summer, maybe. And in that world, I want Loves big expiring
Agree with your concept, but do not agree with committing $60 million to an injury prone player at the expense of a $21 million contract of a malcontent player. If that were my option, unless I got some quality picks from the Cavs, I would rather hold on to Bledsoe and see if his contract can be used at the deadline for a piece.
Ok, I get the rationale, but how do you see Love fitting with this team now? Does adding him make us a better team right now? I’ll take him over Bledsoe as a player obviously, but what about if we can’t trade for that “star” player next year either? Love would become a massive boulder of an expiring who limits our flexibility tremendously next year filling the same role of Bledsoe, Adams this year where we are discussing trading assets for another team to take these contracts.
Last edited by Darkhorse985; 07-26-2021 at 11:09 AM.
Again, if you assume recent past Love = future Love
But that would have been a bad assumption for Blake, Rose, Batum, Reggie Jackson, and dozens of other players in the past. Personally, I think Love will show good production at over the next two years if he goes to a solid situation.. I think he could provide 15-18 million dollar level value for good teams. I think he could be a top 80 player, still. WILL he be? I dont know - I cant see the future, but why hire Aaron Nelson if not for this exact situation? Where if you keep a guy healthy, he can provide much more value than his acquisition cost
Again, Love might not be that guy, but I really dislike the general idea of 'Guy who was good last year will be good next year' and 'Guy who was bad last year will be bad next year' --- if that were true, all teams would only go after a handful of players and cost amongst those players skyrockets. You have to get value by betting on some guys who were bad recently
I thought for a second that Love might have been "doggin it" in Cleveland like Blake was doing in Detroit. Blake admitted that he was fine (health) in Detroit but he didn't want to be a part of that crap-show with the Pistons.
But Love is truly injured. When he opted out of the Olympics because he's still not fully healed... that convinced me that this dude will probably never be healthy enough to be counted on for half of the season. Its not even about the contract... even if he were getting league minimum there's no justification to put him on your roster if you're expecting him to contribute.
However if you want to bring him in for the expiring contract next year, then that'll work... but I wouldn't expect him to suit up much if at all.
But it is not just "guy who was bad last year will be bad next year." It is, an old guy who has missed a ton of games with injuries and whether he finds a way to get healthier. I would be willing to take a risk if he were younger or if he did not come with $60 million guaranteed.
This. You keep beating this drum Mac, but most see Love as an aged, injury prone, poor fit who is owed about $60 million over 2 years. Adding him seems like the risk is way more than any reward. He will never be Kevin Love from 6 years ago on the T wolves. That is over. He has always been a defensive net negative. The only value is a big who can shoot and rebound for 50-60 games a year, again, at 2 years $60 million.
Right now the Pels need to maintain flexibility if they are not going to add a star player. Love’s contract would be harder to move than Bledsoe and Adams without a doubt. It would be a move in the wrong direction in building this team. I’d rather have Lowry at 2 years, $60 million all day.
Last edited by Darkhorse985; 07-26-2021 at 01:19 PM.
By that logic (assuming the cost isn't exorbitant), would you be in favor of trading for Ben Simmons with the belief being that Fred Vinson can fix his shot?
I mean, while I don't agree with MM on the whole ''lets get Kevin Love'' thing, I don't really thing this is an honest comparison.
Kevin Love was a guy who, when healthy, was very good. The issue with health is ''can he do what we've already seen him do consistently going forward''.
The idea of Simmons becoming a serious shooter is not that. That's not ''can we get around an obstacle to have him do what he's already done more consistently'', it's ''can we bolt on an entire skillset to a guy who has historically shown absolutely zero interest or aptitude for this skillset''. It's a different hypothetical to entertain, and a less realistic one.
Basketball.
I like the idea of trading for Love if you aren't giving up anything. He'll provide you with more value than Bledsoe when he's out there. He's also a guy who has been through a ton throughout his career and could provide some perspective to our young guys in the locker room.
I would, however, want a future 1st for taking on Love's contract considering its twice the value and length than that of Bledsoe. In addition, we would be aiding them in their hopes to resign Allen by sending Hart through a sign and trade.
Love's fit on the court is obviously a perfect fit with Zion offensively, although I'd prefer Bojan all things considered.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote