Time to lock the thread. Your franchise has to be run by idiots to trade the 3rd pick in a top heavy draft.
In short: we already have sort of a roster logjam. We need talent to rise to the top. #3 is much more likely to do that.
All of this is just echoing media sentiment . Green isn’t a scout and is a rookie .you don’t “appease” him at this point maybe there is a top 3 . But the actual results could differ . Would it be that big a surprise if one of the bigs fell out of top 3 ?
I listened to the podcast, and that’s simply not what Jalen said. He said we landed at 3 and that there are three great players, obviously referring to the fact that we can get a great player at 3. He never said there is a “top three.” If anything, Jalen’s been really complimentary about Ivey.
If Detroit loves Paolo (and we don't) Trading #3 and Bucks pick for #5 and Grant makes sense if we can then move Grant/Tate/Gordon to Portland for #7. Then use Wood and #17 to get #13. #5-Murray #7-Eason or Sochan #13- Williams or Duren
Sounds good in theory but 3 more rookies on top of the 4 rookies from last year is tough for player development.
So does playing Wood 30.8 minutes per game, Gordon 29.3 minutes per game, and Tate 26.4 minutes per game.
It's a hypothetical situation, of course, but I don't think it's very complicated. It's basically which do you think helps the Rockets more: A) One of Banchero or Ivey B) Two of Shaeden Sharpe, AJ Griffin, Jalen Duren, Benedict Mathurin, Keegan Murray etc. Personally, I don't know enough about the players in the second group to say one way or the other. Then again, I'm not very high on Banchero or Ivey either, so I'd say it's worth considering.
I think i'd have to make the trade for 5 & 7... I'm just not completely rock solid sold on anyone in this draft (pref Jabari) so I have to believe 2 shots in the top 7 give us better odds on a hit than 1 top 3 pick... Ironically, i'm in favor of consolidating assets for a greater impact player... but i believe 5 & 7 (for 3) is just too much value to pass on...
im not sure if u are agreeing or disagreeing... the draft you cite perfectly illustrates my view - so im gonna assume agreeing? lol coulda been screwed taking Thabeet at 2... meanwhile Steph Curry went at #7.... straight 3 for 5 & 7 is Harden vs Steph n Rubio... id take the 5/7 combo over Harden... meanwhile trading up from #17 would lose Jrue - while 10-16 were crap... lol
Are y'all really advocating giving up our (likely top 6) pick next year to move up a pot or two in the draft? 1. Last lotto pick (ours) we will likely have for three years. 2. The "consolation prize" is Paolo Banchero. 3. That pick could likely be the centerpiece of a trade to secure a young allstar if available next year. 4. I am all for moving up if that's what the organization wants to do. But it needs to be limited to some of these lower value assets or players.
Keep #3 get anyone of the 3 forwards that are currently the consensus top 3 by nearly 90% of pundits. Then look at 7 from Portland, 8 Pelicans, 10 Wizards, 11 Knicks and finally 13 Hornets. All of those are possible with the correct deal, they have all been rumored looking for playoff help. You don't pass on any of the top 4 IMO.
I keep #3 and take Banchero if that's who's available. Then, I offer whatever Sacramento wants to move into 4th and get Ivey. Then I offer whatever I have left to get Williams.
I would do it and go for Keegan Murray at 5, unless Kings value him over Ivey. I would almost consider Murray at 3, but the chance to get Smith or Chet is too good to pass up.
