| . |
 |
Why would they need to give up Kira, Jax, or NAW to sign someone who is a free agent. Picks and salary filler should be enough assuming that Lowry would want to sign with the Pelicans. And if Toronto wants more than that to take back salary filler, the Pels could look for a third team to take on salary filler for picks and Toronto could be left with just a trade exception.Originally Posted by Speakthetruth
Either of the trade downs with Bledsoe makes sense. The only issue with the NYK trade is that the rumor is they are trying to get into the lottery in order to get a better pick to facilitate a trade for Sexton.
Pels could also just turn the Lonzo and Hart signings into sign and trades and make it a 4 team deal in order to match salary. They don't have to include Bled or Adams. Or they can renounce their FAs and stretch Bled and sign Lowry outright. There's no leverage here from Toronto's perspective. They're doing us a favor, yes, so you give them some small assets; but there are a number of other means in which the Pels can acquire Lowry.
Well in that case:
NOP: 19, 21
NYK: Sexton, Bledsoe
CLE: 10, 35, Knox, Toppin (or Quickley or Mitchell if necessary)
I would prefer pursuing Sexton ourselves.
A Bleacher Report Article on the five players who need a change of scenery.....
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...f-scenery-most
1. Bradley Beal
2. Damian Lillard
3. Ben Simmons
4. Myles Turner
5. Zion Williamson
About Zion author wrote:
"The New Orleans Pelicans' interest in free agent Kyle Lowry, first reported by Marc Stein, suggests they're serious about appeasing Zion Williamson, their 21-year-old franchise cornerstone.
It also suggests they're desperate.
Maybe Williamson's official trade demand is a year or two away. Then again, maybe reports of his family's frustration with an organization that parted ways with Stan Van Gundy after just one season, signed Steven Adams to that inexplicable extension and failed to surround Williamson with enough shooting will speed up that timeline.
It's exceptionally rare for a player to force his way off a team this early in his career. Kristaps Porzingis made it out of New York on his rookie deal, but even he hung around until his fourth season. Williamson would be blazing a new trail by angling for a trade any time soon.
When a lottery team targets an expensive, 35-year-old guard, it broadcasts an unsettling level of urgency.
The Pelicans lose stars. Chris Paul and Anthony Davis engineered their own exits, and the early plans for Zion's road out of town already appear to be taking shape.
Lowry would help, but New Orleans isn't set up to maximize Williamson's game. It lacks shooting, secondary playmaking and wing defense—not to mention a center who can deter opponents at the rim without getting in Zion's way on the other end.
It's not necessarily easy to build around a ball-handling, suspect-shooting power forward, but the Pelicans are making it look a lot harder than it ought to be."
Frustrating to read those kind of takes. When a player gets selected #1 overall, it is ridiculous to think all of the issues with a team picking that high can be solved in one or two seasons.
They beg the Pels to add talent but then scoff when the Pels make a concerted effort to do so through the only means currently available. Quite frustrating
Adding talent is one thing. Giving up assets for short term upgrades is another. THAT reeks of desperation and doesnt make sense considering what Griff did last year. He could have had a Jrue/CP3 backcourt if he wanted. Instead, he sold. And now, he wants to go buy a Lowry or a Lillard? Makes no sense.
Conversely, if he likes Sexton or Sabonis or OG, and gives up picks for them, that makes sense and doesnt smell desperate. It all comes down to precisely what he buys
@mcnamara247
The assets we got for Jrue are far different than those we would give for Lowry. Idk how that?s comparable at all
Lets say you give up a pick for Lowry -- now you have given up 2 of the 3 we got for Jrue for Lowry and Steven Adams. And you paid Adams and Bledsoe more than Lowry would have made last year (by a lot). And you would be paying Adams and Lowry as much or more as you would have been paying Jrue if you re-signed him.
It makes absolutely no sense. Give up an in his prime guard for the right to overpay two past their prime guys and you are only up 1 first, and two pick swaps you probably wont use. Thats an awful deal.
Selling Jrue made all the sense in the world. Using any of those assets and cap space to get Adams made no sense. Using more assets to get other short term, past their prime dudes would just compound that error.
I agree. Ain’t no way we collected all those assets to end up with Kyle Lowry.
"Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it."
- el-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz
This!! To do so would surpass 'Dell Demps-Bad', IMO!!!
We’re not trading real assets to get Lowry. Relax
To sign him outright, you'd have to use assets to get off guys. If you sign and trade Lonzo for you, you are forfeiting the right to sign and trade him for assets to someone else
So, yes, if the Pels acquire Lowry, they would be giving up assets one way or another
Contributor
Indeed. If it was possible to get him while somehow buying low, go for it. Lowry at a premium? Uh. No, no, no. We no likey.
The team should be looking to do what is best for the team now. We shouldn?t be worried about the past mistakes of the last 2 years. Trading Adams and the Lakers 2022 1st round pick for Lowry would be a solid move for this team who is taking a completely win now mindset. They don?t have to pay Lowry a max 5 year extension like they would have paid Jrue. Lowry should still have a solid 2 to 3 years left in him and he just has to fill the role of veteran leader and 3rd option on offense which he would do nicely. Lowry is the same quality of player as Jrue Holiday but 2/3rds the cost and half the length of commitment.
The argument that we shouldn’t give up assets for talented veterans because we traded Jrue Holiday and didn’t trade for Chris Paul last year is silly. The argument should be against desperately overpaying and get ripped off in trade deals.
Last edited by Darkhorse985; 07-20-2021 at 09:33 PM.
He is desperate though and it's completely of his own making
Sexton, Sabonis, and OG are not proven veteran winners/leaders like Lowry. Adding Lowry changes the culture of this team. Adding Sexton, Sabonis, or OG do not change the culture of this team. Zion is a completely different player from where he was a year ago. Griffin has previously admitted that he never thought that Zion would be this good this fast, which completely changes his plan for team building. We have a top 10 player in the league and are appropriately looking for “win now” players.
I agree that you shouldnt have past mistakes sway current moves. In an ideal world, Griff imagines he inherited this exact roster and set of assets this year, with no thoughts of past mistakes and the baggage that brings. But even in a vacuum, it is impossible to convince me that Lowry at any cost is the BEST move. Could it be good? Sure. But it is not A vs not A. Its A vs B vs C vs D, etc etc when choosing an option
Are you SURE he does? Did Adams or JJ? Thats what they were brought in for. And what if Lowry, like most short aging guards gets injured and cant play? Is he still changing the culture from the bench? I remember Nash going to the Lakers. All time great player, fantastic teammate and leader. But guys arent going to be led by someone in street clothes.
Look, I could make all the best case scenarios for any player. Made a case for Lowry earlier in the thread if all goes right. But every fan makes the best case argument for every rookie, every FA or trade addition their team makes in the offseason, but many picks and acquisitions go really bad too. You gotta be honest about the possible downside as well.
Sorry, I don't see a top 10 player on this team. "Homers" always overvalue their guys.
Guys who are only positives on one side of the ball and are top 10 players - Lillard, Harden, and Steph
Zion would have to make a MAJOR jump to get to that level of all around offensive force
You could have made the same argument against Chris Paul. Sure, any acquisition could get injured. Sexton and OG could as well. At least Lowry has the skins on his wall and has not shown a significant decline in his game yet. You make the move as a short term investment that changes the culture of this team which could then attract the next truly great player to pair with Zion. OG and Sexton are just solid young players who we can make excuses for being young when we lose again next year. The Zion leaving after 4 years chatter would get louder. Lowry brings expectation and a true PG leader which is what this team needs to grow. The Pels also wouldn’t give up anything close to obtain Lowry as we would to obtain Sexton, Sabonis, or OG. We would still keep our long term future flexibility with multiple draft picks.
Last edited by Darkhorse985; 07-20-2021 at 10:55 PM.
Pointing to an outlier to support your case, does not a good argument make
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote