Pels trying to get Beal with the #4 (Per Shams)

[HartOfaPelican]

Serious question: if you're not willing to trade Jrue (which I agree with, no trading there), Ingram, or Ball, who are you willing to trade? Solo and Moore? Is that it?

Well.. i def dont see them doing Solo and Moore.

We dont do Jrue.

Ball does not make sense if they want the 4th for Garland (assuming).

So Ingram is the only person that would make sense to me.

[Saints#34]

I mean, I know we love Jrue but they play the same position. I don’t understand the logic behind trading Ingram to land Beal.
I get trading Ball. And I get trading Jrue. It may be a lateral move talent wise but Beal is 25 and fits our timeline much better than Jrue.
But rolling out Lonzo, Beal and Jrue with no SF seems like a bad plan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[msusousaphone]

Absolutely no for trading Jrue. Jrue and a 4th would be absolute overkill.

Can't Zion play SF? People keep asking "who plays SF" but everything has always been that the guy is like a SF/PF that even has traits of a G and C, right?

Also, it would be so sweet to trade Ball and #4 for Beal. Resign Elfrid. Then we would have a three man rotation at PG/SG and Hart and Frank add depth. You would have Ingram and Zion rotating at SF and PF with Kenrich backing up SF and Wood at PF. C would be the only weak spot with Okafor and Wood but everything else would be bangin.

The Wiz would have to be ok with Ball and Garland.....or be high on Culver or Hunter.

And we keep forgetting Moore. Not a good starting SF but the guy is an excellent 6th man and everything we need on a "building around Zion" team.

[Darkhorse985]

I mean, I know we love Jrue but they play the same position. I don’t understand the logic behind trading Ingram to land Beal.
I get trading Ball. And I get trading Jrue. It may be a lateral move talent wise but Beal is 25 and fits our timeline much better than Jrue.
But rolling out Lonzo, Beal and Jrue with no SF seems like a bad plan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Holiday guarded the best wing on any team all last year including the longest SF in the league, KD, and should have been 1st team all defense. Jrue can fill the role of “SF.”

[rezburna]

I believe Beal is a huge upgrade over Jrue Holiday offensively. However, I fancy the idea of a Holiday-Ball (nickname?) backcourt. I also don’t want to trade Ingram because he plays the hardest position to fill and is the best player we’ve had at that spot since Peja Stojakovic. If we need a player like Beal then we can just draft Garland. Cheaper and younger. No need to rush things.

[neworleanshoo]

Definitely only want Beal if we keep Jrue at the 2. I could part with Ingram.

[Saints#34]

Absolutely no for trading Jrue. Jrue and a 4th would be absolute overkill.

Can't Zion play SF? People keep asking "who plays SF" but everything has always been that the guy is like a SF/PF that even has traits of a G and C, right?

Also, it would be so sweet to trade Ball and #4 for Beal. Resign Elfrid. Then we would have a three man rotation at PG/SG. You would have Ingram and Zion rotating at SF and PF with Kenrich backing up SF and Wood at PF. C would be the only weak spot with Okafor and Wood but everything else would be bangin.

Yeah I mean trading Ball and 4 for Beal makes perfect sense to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pelicanidae]

Absolutely no for trading Jrue. Jrue and a 4th would be absolute overkill.

Can't Zion play SF? People keep asking "who plays SF" but everything has always been that the guy is like a SF/PF that even has traits of a G and C, right?.

Zion's the kind of guy who, depending on line-ups, you can kind of say he's whatever position you want. He can do the small-ball, Draymond style 5. He can play the Barkley style PF. He can do a kind of Lebron-esque SF job. He wasn't used much at Duke in a guard-ish way, but he definitely showed great potential there. On defense, he can guard 1 through 5, again kinda like Draymond can.

[Darkhorse985]

Lineup after FA

PG: Ball/Payton/Jackson
SG: Beal/Hart
SF: Holiday/Williams/pick #39
PF: Williamson/Mirotic/Diallo
C: Howard/Okafor/Wood

[Mythrol]

I'm not sure why people are concerned or even thinking about putting Jrue on SFs. First Jrue has done it a ton already but second... Why wouldn't we just get Lonzo to guard the SF? He's 6'6 with 6'9 wingspan. He should be fine against most SFs we face and when he's not, then we can put Jrue on them.

[Sleeper]

With all of this interest, i’m almost certain we are trading that 4th pick and will love what we get


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pelicanidae]

I'm not sure why people are concerned or even thinking about putting Jrue on SFs. First Jrue has done it a ton already but second... Why wouldn't we just get Lonzo to guard the SF? He's 6'6 with 6'9 wingspan. He should be fine against most SFs we face and when he's not, then we can put Jrue on them.

I'm convinced that on offense, it really doesn't matter who plays what.

There has to be a certain set of skills present among 5 players on offense, but which one of them is tallest doesn't matter at all to me. People need to be able to shoot, to handle the ball, to pass, and to create their own shot: doesn't matter if they're 6'1 or 6'11 (although obviously that's extreme, please do not roll out 5 guys who are all 6'1).

And like you said, on defense it doesn't really matter what position they play on offense: Jrue spent 40+ possessions last season guarding Kevin Durant and it was demonstrably fine, even if he was technically guarding 'up' in that situation.

[60minutes]

Serious question: if you're not willing to trade Jrue (which I agree with, no trading there), Ingram, or Ball, who are you willing to trade? Solo and Moore? Is that it?

Right now, yes. But as I said before, I do not think we should move the #4 pick unless we are getting a talented young vet. In my opinion, we made the mistake of trying to do a quick build with AD. Trading Nerlens Noel for Jrue Holiday worked out but all too often we were moving picks for veterans that did not pan out. To me, unless you are getting someone like Beal or Tatum (in which case trading one of the three might make some sense), then it is better to keep the pick. I think DeAndre Hunter is underrated and I think Garland and Culver are better options than trading for someone like Kevin Love with his bloated contract.

[Pelicanidae]

Right now, yes. But as I said before, I do not think we should move the #4 pick unless we are getting a talented young vet. In my opinion, we made the mistake of trying to do a quick build with AD. Trading Nerlens Noel for Jrue Holiday worked out but all too often we were moving picks for veterans that did not pan out. To me, unless you are getting someone like Beal or Tatum (in which case trading one of the three might make some sense), then it is better to keep the pick. I think DeAndre Hunter is underrated and I think Garland and Culver are better options than trading for someone like Kevin Love with his bloated contract.

I'd agree in the case of Kevin Love, absolutely want no part of him and his deal at all.

I would argue that DeAndre Hunter is not underrated at all: he's pretty much universally seen as a top 8 pick, I've seen a bunch of mock drafts having him going as high as 5, and there are people on this forum who are convinced it's a tragedy if we don't end up drafting him. Given the fact that he's a little older than you'd like from a rookie, has a relatively limited offensive game, and projects only mid-level as a team defender (although very good 1-on-1), I'd say that's actually totally fair and maybe even a bit generous, rather than underrated.

[HartOfaPelican]

Lineup after FA

PG: Ball/Payton/Jackson
SG: Beal/Hart
SF: Holiday/Williams/pick #39
PF: Williamson/Mirotic/Diallo
C: Howard/Okafor/Wood

I mean... can someone say championship!!

I would go after what’s his name from Orlando hard with this lineup. We would be VERY difficult to beat!

[Pelicanidae]

Some of you guys just yesterday: ''We don't need to do everything in one off-season, we don't need to rush developments, we have the assets to make measured moves rather than rushing''

Same people today: ''TRADE JRUE FOR BEAL, MAX OUT VUCEVIC, ACQUIRE DWIGHT HOWARD, WE'RE GOING FOR THE 2020 RING!!!!''

edit: before someone gets mad at me, YES this is hyperbolic. It's just funny to watch us all run through every possibility in 24 hours.

[HartOfaPelican]

Some of you guys just yesterday: ''We don't need to do everything in one off-season, we don't need to rush developments, we have the assets to make measured moves rather than rushing''

Same people today: ''TRADE JRUE FOR BEAL, MAX OUT VUCEVIC, ACQUIRE DWIGHT HOWARD, WE'RE GOING FOR THE 2020 RING!!!!''

edit: before someone gets mad at me, YES this is hyperbolic. It's just funny to watch us all run through every possibility in 24 hours.

I agree and disagree with you!

If we can get Beal who is 25 for the 4th and Ingram that is a NO BRAINER! He is one of the best in the league at his position.

All I’m saying is.... if we add Vucevic via FA we are not only a contender now... but with the kids and the picks... we are set up to be a powerhouse for the next 5-10 years.

[60minutes]

I'd agree in the case of Kevin Love, absolutely want no part of him and his deal at all.

I would argue that DeAndre Hunter is not underrated at all: he's pretty much universally seen as a top 8 pick, I've seen a bunch of mock drafts having him going as high as 5, and there are people on this forum who are convinced it's a tragedy if we don't end up drafting him. Given the fact that he's a little older than you'd like from a rookie, has a relatively limited offensive game, and projects only mid-level as a team defender (although very good 1-on-1), I'd say that's actually totally fair and maybe even a bit generous, rather than underrated.

I think it is sad when we treat 21 as if he is old. But the other thing I'll say here is that Hunter profiles as a pro-ready prospect who should take lesser time to develop than some of the others who might be considered. Lastly, being a potential top 8 prospect does not mean that he is not underrated. I worry about his ball handling but I think he is a terrific shooter and his long wingspan only adds to what he is able to offer defensively. He is either the 4th or 5th best prospect in the draft in my view though the opinion on him varies.

And I am glad you agree on Love but I wish you also agreed that Demps made a mistake by repeatedly opting for veterans that were never going to help us win championships rather than choosing to develop talent. It was kind of like the Lakers' model of targeting stars without actually getting stars.

[Pelicanidae]

I think it is sad when we treat 21 as if he is old. But the other thing I'll say here is that Hunter profiles as a pro-ready prospect who should take lesser time to develop than some of the others who might be considered. Lastly, being a potential top 8 prospect does not mean that he is not underrated. I worry about his ball handling but I think he is a terrific shooter and his long wingspan only adds to what he is able to offer defensively. He is either the 4th or 5th best prospect in the draft in my view though the opinion on him varies.

And I am glad you agree on Love but I wish you also agreed that Demps made a mistake by repeatedly opting for veterans that were never going to help us win championships rather than choosing to develop talent. It was kind of like the Lakers' model of targeting stars without actually getting stars.

21 is old for a first year rookie. He's going to be 3 years older than Zion on draft night, 2 years older than Morant and Barrett, and even a little older than Culver. It's not 'old' old, but for a first year rookie, it is old relative to everyone else.

Okay: Hunter is underrated in the way that Lillard is underrated. Everyone loves him, everyone thinks he's going to be great or is great already, everyone has him as a sure-fire top guy, especially at his position, everyone thinks he's going to be NBA ready day one and yet he's underrated. Just like how Lillard is underrated despite being a multiple time All-star, multiple time All-NBA, consensus top 20 player.

I'm not sure what you're talking about when you imply that I don't agree Demps made a mistake in trading for vets rather than drafting and building through developing. I've repeatedly said for months that I believe we should be looking to build gradually, largely through the draft rather than through trades, at least for the moment. Part of the reason that I favoured the Knicks trade for AD was their ability to offer us multiple, long term first round picks that would help the draft and development plan. I have no idea what you're talking about.

[60minutes]

I'm not sure what you're talking about when you imply that I don't agree Demps made a mistake in trading for vets rather than drafting and building through developing. I've repeatedly said for months that I believe we should be looking to build gradually, largely through the draft rather than through trades, at least for the moment. Part of the reason that I favoured the Knicks trade for AD was their ability to offer us multiple, long term first round picks that would help the draft and development plan. I have no idea what you're talking about.

If I misunderstood, my apologies. But I was referring to your previous post in which you said, "I'd agree in the case of Kevin Love..." It can be interpreted (and I guess misinterpreted) as I am with you on the opinion of specifically trading for Kevin Love but otherwise more generally in disagreement where it concerns trading for veterans. No big deal, apparently I misread your point of view.

[Pelicanidae]

If I misunderstood, my apologies. But I was referring to your previous post in which you said, "I'd agree in the case of Kevin Love..." It can be interpreted (and I guess misinterpreted) as I am with you on the opinion of specifically trading for Kevin Love but otherwise more generally in disagreement where it concerns trading for veterans. No big deal, apparently I misread your point of view.

Yeah, what I meant was that I can see the argument in the case of some players (like Beal, because he's younger etc etc) even if I don't quite agree that we should make that move, whereas with Love I don't even understand why anyone would want him.

[60minutes]

Yeah, what I meant was that I can see the argument in the case of some players (like Beal, because he's younger etc etc) even if I don't quite agree that we should make that move, whereas with Love I don't even understand why anyone would want him.

I see. I think there are very few players in the league that it would work for. Beal and Tatum are still young and have the chance to grow with Zion while still offering experience and the ability to help Jrue and the team be successful. In fact, it would be ideal in the sense that Zion would be added to a team that had young, talented veterans who could potentially get you to the playoffs and maybe in the next 2-3 seasons could become championship caliber as Zion blossoms. I guess Turner falls into this category somewhat but if landing him means creating a hole, say, at SF by trading Ingram then I think we ought not to do it.

[donato]

I think DeAndre Hunter is underrated and I think Garland and Culver are better options than trading for someone like Kevin Love with his bloated contract.

The eyeball test to me says Hunter is a lesser Otto Porter. Hard pass. Garland brings little more than shooting (bad defense) and Culver can't shoot from 3. I'd rather grab Coby White (super quick and very good shooting) or Doumbouya (athleticism, skill, potential).

[redrum]

So what if the interest in Barrett ,(the discussions about trading up and the hyping of Culver) is just because Washington has told the Pels, get him and Beal is yours?

[Pelicanidae]

So what if the interest in Barrett ,(the discussions about trading up and the hyping of Culver) is just because Washington has told the Pels, get him and Beal is yours?

Doesn't make too much of a difference to me. At some point, you're paying too much for Beal. If it costs a ridiculous amount to trade up to #2, and then you have to move both #2 and another asset to Washington to Beal, after a certain amount of assets you're just getting robbed.

If it cost us, for example, #4, Moore, and our 2020 FRP to move up to #2, and then it cost #2, Ingram, and a Lakers pick to get Beal, then in reality all you've done is trade Beal for #4, Ingram, Moore, your 2020 FRP, and a Lakers pick. And that's too much.