The Clippers don’t really have any long-term assets outside of Lou Williams. The only way he ends up there is if Pop cuts off his nose to spite his Kawhi. And he could send him to worse places and get more in return anyway.
Jurassic World 3: Where the Dinosaurs have Quad Injuries and Hate Their Shoe Deals
- Thread starter Sox Puppet
- Start date
Jerry West has rarely failed. LAC is a long shot but possible if other dominos fall. Harris and the 12 and 13 would be a decent haul for the Spurs.
Harris is a free agent after next season, and the Spurs are doing nothing this season if Kawhi leaves, so it’s basically the 12 and 13, which should put the Clippers last in terms of their package. Throw in Williams and, well they’re probably still last. West might be great, but the Clippers just don’t have the assets to compete and who knows if by “LA,” Kawhi means the “Lakers with LeBron.”
Or the LAC with LeBron...not saying it will happen, but West’s power of persuasion is legendary.
Not sure how Kawhi on the Clippers is interesting. They would be a playing team, maybe, but that's not too exciting.
Durant partially credited him with his GS decision (he gave a whole heartfelt spiel about how painful it was to be #2 year after year).
And I could see Ballmer being a more appealing “business partner” (for Kawhi or LeBron) than Buss and the Lakers crew.
As far as assets to sell, I’m not sure three cheap years of Ball/Kuzma and two cheap years of Ingram is that much more appealing than the Clips’ #12-13 this season.
The main sell for the Lakers is that they’re the Lakers and the Clippers are the Clippers.
You misread what I wrote, I referenced the “former” meaning Hayward. Kyrie is clearly a PG and by trading him it creates a (potential) whole, which is one of my arguments as to why trading him is less likely than Hayward.
Explain why it’s stupid? The guy gave us 5 mins for what $28MM last year? I understand it was a gruesome injury and we all feel terrible for him, but the rules in FA are if you don’t get a no-trade clause, you are subject to trade. Also he can leave in 2 years anyway and could very well do so if he doesn’t return to form. If your rebuttal is FA won’t sign here after, and I’d agree with that to a certain extent, I’d point to being able to trade a top 20 guy for a top 3 MVP candidate (when healthy of course). In my opinion, you do that no matter what the circumstances and most agents/players would understand that.
https://www.theringer.com/nba/2018/6/15/17469674/kawhi-leonard-spurs-trades-next-moves
Didn't see this posted.
I hate O'Connor's proposed Boston-SA trade for KL.
"....Here are seven made-up trade proposals that would represent San Antonio’s best-case scenarios:
From the Lakers: Ingram, Kuzma, Hart, Deng, no. 25 pick in 2018, 2021 first-round pick (unprotected)
From the Celtics: Jaylen Brown, Terry Rozier, Marcus Morris, Guerschon Yabusele, Abdel Nader, 2019 Kings first (top-one protected), 2019 Grizzlies first (top-eight protected, top-six protected in 2020, unprotected in 2021)
From the Clippers: Tobias Harris, the no. 12 and no. 13 pick, 2021 first (unprotected)
From the Sixers: Markelle Fultz, Dario Saric, Robert Covington, Jerryd Bayless, no. 10 pick
From the Knicks: Frank Ntilikina, no. 9 pick, 2020 and 2022 firsts (unprotected)
From the Kings: No. 2 pick, Justin Jackson, Skal Labissiere, 2021 first (unprotected)
From the Suns: No. 1 pick, Josh Jackson, Dragan Bender, 2021 first (unprotected)
IMO the Celts overpay relative to the other packages is massive.
Didn't see this posted.
I hate O'Connor's proposed Boston-SA trade for KL.
"....Here are seven made-up trade proposals that would represent San Antonio’s best-case scenarios:
From the Lakers: Ingram, Kuzma, Hart, Deng, no. 25 pick in 2018, 2021 first-round pick (unprotected)
From the Celtics: Jaylen Brown, Terry Rozier, Marcus Morris, Guerschon Yabusele, Abdel Nader, 2019 Kings first (top-one protected), 2019 Grizzlies first (top-eight protected, top-six protected in 2020, unprotected in 2021)
From the Clippers: Tobias Harris, the no. 12 and no. 13 pick, 2021 first (unprotected)
From the Sixers: Markelle Fultz, Dario Saric, Robert Covington, Jerryd Bayless, no. 10 pick
From the Knicks: Frank Ntilikina, no. 9 pick, 2020 and 2022 firsts (unprotected)
From the Kings: No. 2 pick, Justin Jackson, Skal Labissiere, 2021 first (unprotected)
From the Suns: No. 1 pick, Josh Jackson, Dragan Bender, 2021 first (unprotected)
IMO the Celts overpay relative to the other packages is massive.
To his credit, near the end he says he structured the trades to send SA four current, former, or future picks. I agree that’s a massive overpay, and he goes on to say it would be easier for Boston if they used a S&T of Smart with Jaylen. That’s a very attractive package for SAS on its own.
I don’t understand this at all. Ball and Ingram are potential all star players, both picked second overall. The odds of getting even one player of their caliber at 12 or 13 combined is quite low. That’s “hope to get Kelly Olynyk” territory.
From a risk perspective, I'm wary of having invested so much player and draft capital in KL and now having 2 guys (KI and KL) who are both coming off injuries and who could both walk away (or limp) after 1 year of playing in Boston. If I were Ainge unless I had some certainties about resignability or health, I would want to avoid that risk,
You can say that again. Phoenix ain't sending the #1, Josh Jackson, Dragan and an unprotected first in 2021. O'Connor seems to be forgetting what everyone else here is fully cognizant of: it's not clear Leonard is healthy and he has one year until free agency, and he's just demanded to be traded. This is called being behind the eight ball if you're San Antonio. Sure, there could be a little bidding war, but I'd be surprised it it gets this crazy.
Edit to add: I doubt Phoenix would do this if it were only this year's #1 for Leonard, straight up. Why would they? It's not like they're really good and Leonard is the missing piece that will get them to a championship this year. Instead, with Leonard, they might make the playoffs, then Leonard will blow out of town, and they'll get to watch Ayton turn into a superstar for the Spurs.
Last edited:
How about this:
Spurs get George Hill, #4 and #8
Grizzlies get Kevin Love
Cavs get Kawhi and Chandler Parsons
Spurs get two top 8 picks in a good draft without taking on long-term salary, Grizzlies get a veteran star to pair with Conley and Gasol and shed the horrible Parsons contract, and Cavs get their superstar to pair with LeBron.
Spurs get George Hill, #4 and #8
Grizzlies get Kevin Love
Cavs get Kawhi and Chandler Parsons
Spurs get two top 8 picks in a good draft without taking on long-term salary, Grizzlies get a veteran star to pair with Conley and Gasol and shed the horrible Parsons contract, and Cavs get their superstar to pair with LeBron.
But if the Spurs do take the Clippers package, we know they just don't view the Lakers' young guys as potential All-Stars (or as guys they want to pay 2-3 years from now). And I don't think that's crazy. It's not like they have to guess based on the odds of No. 12 or 13 being good so much as evaluate the guys that are actually selected in those slots this year. I could see the appeal of getting players that fit the style of play they're going for and getting 4 full years of control.
Plus, Patty Mills and Dejounte Murray are under contract for another 3 and 2 years respectively, so unless they can shed one, they might see trading for a point guard as redundant.
Last edited:
It’s a big commitment and eats up a lot of future draft capital, but I think the Suns and Kings packages easily top the Celtics offer and the Lakers’ is close (with only the horrible Deng contract weighing it down). It depends on what teams think Jaylen Brown is going forward. I don’t see future superstar, but ymmv.
Last edited:
Kawhi wants to live in LA. He grew up near Riverside, about 70-80 minutes away. So every team except the Lakers and Clippers is buying a rental, and those other teams will adjust their offers accordingly. That list in the Ringer is just silly. I view what OKC paid for Paul George (an overpay BTW) as the best case for San Antonio from every team except the two LA teams.
Last edited:
The fact that they were picked #2 doesn't matter as much as the 1-2 full NBA seasons that we now have to judge them on, any more than it matters that Kuzma was picked #27. To me, those three guys are all pretty comparable in value. How does the value of last year's #13 Donovan Mitchell compare to that of #1 Markelle Fultz? I don't think Ball or Ingram's value has tanked to the degree Fultz's has, but neither do I think either of them is close to as valuable as Mitchell.
Guys drafted in the #11-15 range who I'd consider almost as good as or better than Ball-Ingram-Kuzma...
2013: #12 Adams, #13 Olynyk, #15 Antetokounmpo
2014: #11 McDermott, #12 Saric, #13 LaVine, #14 Warren
2015: #11 Myles Turner, #13 Devin Booker #15 Oubre, #16 Rozier
2016: #11 Sabonis, #12 Prince
2017: #12 Kennard. #13 Mitchell, #14 Adebayo
Factor in the bonus of being able to draft and develop a new pick yourself (a big deal when you're the Spurs), and the 1-2 extra years of cost-control and yeah, I'd definitely consider taking the #12-13 in this putatively excellent draft over any two of Kuzma-Ingram-Ball. As a Cs fan, wouldn't you be tempted to give Ainge/Stevens a shot at drafting and developing the #12-13 this year rather than taking two of Kuzma-Ingram-Ball?
I'm skeptical that any #1 through #5 pick in this year's draft will be part of a package for Leonard (unless he agrees to stick around with the team that he's traded to). San Antonio is in a real position of weakness. At least last summer Irving had two years left on his contract and had played more than nine games of the previous season.
Most of those guys were not good rookies though. So not really fair to compare how good they are now.
And Doug McDermott?
Globe: Celts are interested in KL but not willing to go all in for him:
The Boston GlobeVerified account @BostonGlobe 3m3 minutes ago
.@GWashburnGlobe: The Boston #Celtics do not want to give up a significant part of their future core for one year of Kawhi Leonard. http://bos.gl/5NoPfDL
He cites no sources and gives no quotes.
I do get the feeling the average Boston fan wants to keep the kids and not sell them off for LeBron or Kawhi. Davis might be another story but it would be nice to see the team in place as Danny envisioned for at least one season before making even more changes.
The Boston GlobeVerified account @BostonGlobe 3m3 minutes ago
.@GWashburnGlobe: The Boston #Celtics do not want to give up a significant part of their future core for one year of Kawhi Leonard. http://bos.gl/5NoPfDL
He cites no sources and gives no quotes.
I do get the feeling the average Boston fan wants to keep the kids and not sell them off for LeBron or Kawhi. Davis might be another story but it would be nice to see the team in place as Danny envisioned for at least one season before making even more changes.
It's very close right now and really dependent on what you are looking for so I see a side for either by a tiny margin. I don't agree at all that Rozier is an upgrade over Dejounte over the next several years plus the Spurs love the guy they drafted. They have both been my binkies since draft night but Dejounte is at the age of 21 an elite defender and already one of the best rebounding guards the game has ever seen (has there ever been a 1 with a per36 of 9.5/g?). Perimeter shooting, as we know, is the easiest skill to improve upon provided the player has decent mechanics.
[QUOTE.
I do get the feeling the average Boston fan wants to keep the kids and not sell them off for LeBron or Kawhi. Davis might be another story but it would be nice to see the team in place as Danny envisioned for at least one season before making even more changes.[/QUOTE]
Couldn’t agree more.
I do get the feeling the average Boston fan wants to keep the kids and not sell them off for LeBron or Kawhi. Davis might be another story but it would be nice to see the team in place as Danny envisioned for at least one season before making even more changes.[/QUOTE]
Couldn’t agree more.
The question is do they consider Kyrie part of that future core? I took that as Brown and Tatum being off the table.
There is no such thing as "Ainge's future core"...….he tried moving Pierce across the country to Oregon. Ainge has zero allegiance to Kyrie...…he saw an opportunity to fleece Cleveland with known damaged goods, an overrated role player who requested to be traded, and a Nets pick for a far better asset so he closed the deal.
Regarding the Irving trade Ainge also did say something along the lines of he had brought Horford and Hayward here and he felt some obligation to them to go for it. I'm not saying that that's in conflict with your statement.
ED “I think signing Gordon Hayward and Al Horford, I felt I had a responsibility to give them a chance,” Ainge said.
https://celticswire.usatoday.com/2017/09/27/558-danny-ainge-kyrie-irving-brooklyn-pick-gordon-hayward-al-horford-brad-stevens/
Last edited:
First of all, yes, that was my bad in misreading your comment.
As to trading Hayward, it's stupid unless Brad is as unsentimental as Danny, which I doubt.
What do you consider Russell Westbrook or Oscar Robertson? Fat Lever was pretty great too.
Fair. So let's just take the last two drafts: I'd take Mitchell (obviously) over any of those three Lakers guys, and I'm not sure I'd take any of the three Lakers guys over Adebayo, Sabonis, Kennard, or Prince.
Looking at this year (the relevant sample): I can easily see preferring four cheap years of a talented question mark like Kevin Knox, Zhaire Smith, Troy Brown, Shai Gigeous-Alexander, et al. (whichever the Spurs' savvy front office likes best) over any of the Lakers three.
I really don’t get this. Ingram is arguably a comparable player to Jaylen Brown and they are in basically the same contract situation. Would anyone here even hesitate to turn down the 12 and 13 picks, if offered? Danny would laugh at that offer, right? On top of that, you’re throwing in Ball and maybe Kuzma, as well? Seems like a completely lopsided trade, one that would get GMs and coaches fired.
Mitchell is a rare find, the odds of hitting big that late are far lower than at the top. The last all star picked number 8, for example, was Vin Baker. In 1993.
I understand your argument (not saying I agree with it) but it kind of breaks down when you say you would take Luke Kennard over Brandon Ingram? Too bad you aren't running GSW.
He’s a better offensive player and a more than capable defender (and a year younger). Brown also played on a much better team defense, so it’s difficult to extrapolate how Ingram’s defense would be compared to Brown’s in Stevens’ system. I’d take Brown, but I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Boston would look basically the same had they pulled 2 instead of 3 in the lottery and drafted Ingram. Jaylen was put in a far better system to succeed.
Being put into a better system doesn’t guarantee anything though and as of today, the growth Brown has shown over the same time period makes him much more valuable, especially when considering where they are contractually and the adjustment curve of further development going forward. Ingram isn’t going to go to SA and instantly catch up, it’s going to take at least a year; a year in which (hopefully) Brown furthers his own development and likely pulls away. Conversely, Brown would already be a better fit from jump street because of that were he the one being brought in.
Age and talents are great to cite on draft night when these guys are kind of unmolded clay, but as many here have noted, your ceiling is kind of at mercy to the system and coaching you get drafted into. After a fickle few years, that begins to lower.
Last edited:
How is he a better offensive player? Jaylen Brown is a significantly more efficient scorer with a similar usage rate. The difference in scoring efficiency dwarfs the other differences in their games, where Ingram probably has a slight advantage. Ingram is a much better passer but he also turns the ball over more and doesn't rebound as well.
But, again, the big difference is scoring efficiency. Ingram had a .536 TS% last year. That's what Jaylen Brown posted as a rookie (.539). Ingram had a .474 TS% as a rookie. Jaylen Brown had a .562 TS% this year. And, lest you say Jaylen's performance was a product of being a third/fourth option, he scored with more or less identical efficiency in the playoffs this year despite being asked to be an offensive leader and seeing his usage jump from 21.4% to 24.6%. He also sliced 5% of his turnover rate in the playoffs. Given all of that, the regular season comparison almost certainly understates by a significant margin the degree to which Brown is the better offensive player.
Agree. The key thing here is that Brown is both better now, and has been improving at a faster rate. If you were trying to talk yourself into Ingram, I suppose you could say that Brown had a much more NBA-ready body, but after two years in the NBA for Ingram, I think that starts to become more of a bug than a feature (ie if he hasn't put on muscle yet, will it happen?).
Every single time a disgruntled star goes on the market people start putting together the massive package the trading team will receive. And, unless the acquiring team is the Knicks, every single time the package is significantly worse than expected, because the star limits the destinations, years of team control at low prices have real value, and teams don't want signability uncertainty. It's far more interesting to me to think about what type of deal SA will end up having to accept once all constraints are factored in, but YMMV I suppose.
They are in the same ballpark for sure. Per36 is skewed as the player can exert more energy in a shorter period of time however only Lever came close to Dejounte's rebounding numbers of last season even during his best years. I don't believe any guard, or certainly any 1, has even had a 9.5 per36 rebounding number. As good as Rondo was he never came close. His defensive skills go far beyond rebounding which was why he was a 2nd team All-Defense as a part-time player at age 21.....that doesn't happen.
Westbrook and Oscar have both literally put up 9.5 R/36 so what are you talking about? They also both played twice as much as Murray did. So unless you consider Westbrook and Oscar something other than 1's, you are wrong.
edit: Murray's Rebound Rate% is the 4th best ever posted by a PG though, behind Russell Westbrook twice and some guy named Wiley Peck. And Peck is apparently a SF so I don't know why he showed up in the search.
Last edited:
Surprised that no one mentioned Jason Kidd as a great rebounding guard.
In any event, you can make the case for Murray as a rebounder by simply stating that he had the third best rebounding season (RB%) by a guard of all time. The top two positions are occupied by Russell Westbrook (last year and this year).
In any event, you can make the case for Murray as a rebounder by simply stating that he had the third best rebounding season (RB%) by a guard of all time. The top two positions are occupied by Russell Westbrook (last year and this year).
Ingram was so useless his first season that I don’t think you can meaningfully compare their respective rates of improvement.
Ingram is a full year younger than Jaylen. Jaylen was far better than Ingram as a 2nd year player, but even as someone who is bearish on Ingram, I think that gap is more likely to narrow than widen.
So the best three seasons of all time all occurred in the past two years. Think there’s something wrong with that metric?
The metric is fine. Murray only played 20 minutes and Russell Westbrook is an insane talent who will probably end up owning 7 or 8 of the top 10 spots.
Is there a better way to gauge rebounding ability than to measure the rate of available rebounds that a player gathers? It's a lot less dependent on extrinsic factors than rebounds per (game/36 minutes).
This is massively underrating the value of Lonzo and Ingram. If the Lakers were offered any of those guys straight up for either Lonzo or Ingram, they hang up and probably don't take their calls for a while. Kuzma is maybe in that group of players, I could see him at the top of that group, or near the bottom, but Lonzo/Ingram are well above it. Bam maybe only guy a case could be made for if you thought he could max out his upside.
Agreed, particularly as to Ball. He's a #2 pick coming off a successful rookie season. He isn't Tatum or Mitchell, but a year ago, he would've been the frontrunner for rookie of the year with the season he just had. If I were valuing Ball against this year's draft class, I think he's worth somewhere around the 3-5 pick, straight up. Ingram is harder to value because he has two years of not being any good under his belt but did show good progression year over year. I don't think I'd value Ingram in the top 8 of this year's draft, but would probably prefer him to any option after 8. (I really think there are 7 guys in this draft I, personally, would value higher than Ingram because I'm not a believer in Trae Young, but I'm including him because odds are that any top 8 pick will have the option of selecting one of the 7 guys I do prefer.)
If I'm the Spurs and considering offers, the #2 pick from Sacramento easily beats an offer from LA centered around Ball or Ingram. Ball and Ingram is a much closer call but I'd probably lean toward Ball and Ingram over just the #2 pick. Kuzma doesn't really move the needle much. (Note, I think Brown, by himself, is probably a similar value to the 1 or 2 pick in this draft, as a point of comparison.)
I thought Westbrook was kind of the universally acknowledged example of how accumulating stats like rebounds (and assists) don't necessarily indicate "good basketball plays." I thought I'd seen plenty of videos documenting him lingering around on the D boards to snatch rebounds away from his bigs and making strange decisions on the offensive end that seem less about making the best scoring opportunity and more about getting a chance for an assist.
Taurean Prince is already 23 years old. Two years older than Sabonis and Kennard. Three years older than Ball, Ingram, and Adebayo. No chance anyone chooses him over Ball or Ingram.
I can maybe squint and see liking Sabonis and/or Adebayo over Ball, but even then, I think you gotta go with the wing in Ingram over the centers.
And just not seeing it in Kennard. He is a fine player and will be in the league for years providing some value, but he probably is who he is.
I can maybe squint and see liking Sabonis and/or Adebayo over Ball, but even then, I think you gotta go with the wing in Ingram over the centers.
And just not seeing it in Kennard. He is a fine player and will be in the league for years providing some value, but he probably is who he is.