I'd actually be more intrigued at one of two other options: 1. Since Sacramento is over loaded at PG, SF and PF. Offer them KPJ (natural 2 guard) for the 4th Pick and select Ivey. They don't need another PG when they have Mitchell and Fox. 2. Trading up from 17 to make sure we can get 7'0 Mark Williams. I'd offer #17 and a future Pick for like #12 if it got us that guy. If we can walk away with Banchero and Ivey OR Banchero and Williams it's been a super successful draft.
It'd probably take the #3 + #17 for Orlando to budge at #1 and OKC has so many future firsts they would likely say no.
I think this harder said than done. Two recent examples: Denver Dilemma with Jokic, Murray, and Porter. Even if you ignore the injuries, this team seems like should be a contender but no one really every considers them one because they cannot balance out offense and defense. You could argue they screwed by overvaluing Porter, but that is mistakes teams always make -- overvaluing their own players or not wanting it to appear like they sold low for fit. OKC with Durant, Harden, Westbrook. OKC basically got super lucky with a lot of star players and eventually it came to a head where they all wanted to start and having major roles. We can all agree now that OKC messed up. If they had to trade someone, it should have been Westbrook. I just think you have to consider how the pieces will fit together simply because of the complicated nature of how the NBA cap system works.
I think it was OKC didn't want to pay all 3 big money .... that's why they traded Harden in the first place. Had they been willing to pony up the big money, that team may have stayed together and won a ship or three.
His man defense is solid when he is engaged. He is not a very good at team defense - which unfortunately is exactly what the Rockets do. Also, almost any 4 is going to look good with a rim protector next to them. The problem is that getting a rim protector that can switch well enough to stay on the court against smaller line ups is exceedingly rare. Having said that, if you are the Rockets and are stuck at #3, you take Banchero and you hope you can find a long 3 that switches well and a rim protecting center that doesn't have to be taken out against smaller line ups.... which is just really hard to find. It is why the Rockets should trade up to #1 or #2 if they can get Holmgren, but doing that would require Orlando wanting Smith AND OKC not wanting Smith and the Rockets making the best offer for the pick. It isn't impossible but it requires some luck.
It wasn't that. It was a choice of giving big money to either Ibaka or Harden because, for some idiotic reason, they wanted to keep Kendrick Perkins' corpse on the roster instead of using the amnesty clause on him. They tried to lowball Harden by giving him a small extension offer and when Harden said thanks but no thanks they put him on the trading block.
There's not a surefire guy at 1 to trade up for IMO; plus if you go to 1 and pick the wrong guy when the 2 drafted after him are way better, you set your franchise back a lot
Absolutely, but unfortunately the newish lottery odds make it very unlikely the Rockets get Wembanyama even if we lose every single game. If this was the way the lottery used to be, I would be all for it.
Same. This isn't a bad deal at all for Orlando. They can still end up with a choice between Jabari/Paolo depending on who OKC selects, Ivey, Sharpe, etc. And 17 can still net them a solid prospect.
You think KPJ's value is 4th pick? His value may not even be 1st rounder, and if so, something in the late teens at best. Trading KPJ for Ivey would be one of the most lopsided trades of my lifetime.
We need to save the Milwaukee pick, I would be shocked if that pick is traded before next season starts. This is was supposedly a sticking point for Stone on EG to PHO talks. We just don't need any more short term assets after taking 4 rookies last year. I think Chet is worth pursuing, but I prefer to use players like Wood, Tate, KJM, Gordon or whatever assets we get for them.
Why would we need to save that pick? Barring catastrophic events, that pick would most likely be in the mid to high 20s. Trading pick for picks is the easiest way to make it work cap-wise. When you attach player contracts into the mix now we have to get (most likely unnecessary) players back in return. Trading Wood to Orlando in order to secure the 1st pick requires us to take back $13 million in salaries. Outside of Franz, Bamba and maybe Suggs I don't want any one on that roster.
I'd trade #3, 2024 Nets pick and either Milwaukie Pick or #17 for the No. 1 overall. I'd then tell OKC, we're picking Chet unless you give us 2 of our picks back. OKC says no, take Chet. OKC says yes, be happy with Jabari and having 2 picks (or pick and swap) back.
Why are we worrying about someone fitting with Sengun, he might not be good enough to worry about that.......may the best player win. DD
