I'm not as keen on keeping the 4th for a Miller/ Thompson as others. Siakim is a more win now vs whom you take at 4th still has to get developed. Given what we know about the Rocket Org's direction, I'd keep an eye on this. Rockets can with either use Siakim themselves. Or is there an odd chance to repackage Siakim with our future picks to give to Portland for their 3rd pick or CHA's 2nd for Henderson. Negotiations would require them giving us salary matching fillers.
By all means, divert Siakam to Portland for #3 in some kind of three-team trade if it gets us S. Henderson. That's fine. Trading for Siakam in order to have a mediocre play-in team alongside Harden would be garbage.
Some of the best news reported this offseason becaue for once we don’t sound desperate. I’d not mind make a big trade for a true but we replying our assets for dude that couldn’t be the man on their own squad
Yah I’m not sure why we wouldn’t prefer siakam to a flyer rookie at 4 there is no reason for us to tank so we want to be good as possible next season. I repeat absolutely no reason to tank………we don’t own our picks. If we can get Siakam for 4 harden for no assets we retain 20 to try and move up to get lively we still have players and all of brooklyns assets to go get one more star player this board is shockingly narrow minded… like I’d expect a few fringe people saying no to this but it is the consensus?! Crazy
3 years of tanking just to build a team around Harden and Siakam lmaoo. Signing Harden straight up is fine but I’m not giving up assets for Siakam.
Yes and in the odd chance we take a swing at someone Brown next year. Celtics would want someone tangible back like a Siakim vs just picks alone. Siakim may not be as high of a tier as a Brown, but close enough where our offer would not be immediately out bid by other teams.
Siakim and OG's contract status are problematic. They would need to be resigned at big dollars. Along with Harden, and then potentially Green, Jabari, Sengun.
I don’t think any of these rankings are perfect at all, but they are at least objective third party views of top 100 NBA players ESPN 22-23 Top 100 - OG #75, Jerami Grant #64 Bleacher Report - OG #63, Jerami Grant #65 The Ringer - OG #58, Jerami Grant #53 CBS Sports - OG #59, Jerami Grant #67 Whatever your personal opinion, public consensus sees OG and Jerami Grant as very similar level players, playing the same position. In the exact same one year rental, unextendable contract situation, the best bid the Pistons could get was a future protected late first. And you want the Rockets to give a #4 pick this year for that. That’s like >3x the established market value. You couldn’t get #4 for three picks like that Milwaukee pick. Not going to happen.
Any of y'all who support trading #4 for Siakam should go do a deep dive into the statistics of non-superstar big men in their 30s. A lot of them don't make it past 31 as star-level players. That would be two seasons from now for Siakam, FYI. If you think we can win a championship in the next two years with a Harden/Siakam duo, by all means, be my guest and make the argument. As for me, I think the odds of that are near-zero. We'll just get bounced in the first round or play-in a couple of times, then end up stuck with two aging roleplayers on max contracts and down a top 5 pick that could have become a cost-controlled star player. That's just bad decisionmaking. This isn't baseball, where any playoff team can get lucky/hot and end up winning it all. The NBA is a very all-or-nothing league. Getting stuck in mediocrity with your cap space eaten up by aging non-superstars is the worst possible outcome in this league.
There's no single player on the raptors id trade #4 for. This would need to be a package of players/picks or some sort of three team deal where we land something better than what they have to offer.
#4 is an asset sure, but what if it's a bust. As soon as Rockets use the pick, value goes down. Bari and Green on national boards redraft are not a #2 and #3 for their class. (for now) Plus when talking to teams like Blazers or Celtics (next year), the 'win-now' teams can't do much with our Nets picks. If people feel #4 is worth more, than Stone can ask Raptors to sweeten the deal. Barnes is a non starter, maybe other pieces. Siakim is a fine player, he's not KD. With teams tightening their belts because of new cap rules, agents have to realize these players may not get the big money they are seeking.
You've described a big part of the problem with any team acquiring Siakam. If you give out an asset to get him, you must sign him to an extension. The only way he agrees to an extension and forgoing the open market is to give him the max. Having a low level all star like Siakam on a max contract over his age 30-34 years was bad business on the old CBA. On the new CBA, it's absolutely terrible business. Harden + Siakam on max contracts would kill any chance of Houston being a contender in this decade.
Hit the nail on the head. If Siakam was a free agent this offseason and wanted to sign with the Rockets for a 4 year deal, I don't know if I'd say yes to that. Would be a tough call. Let alone giving up a top 5 pick for the privilege a year from now when he's a year older. That's just terrible roster building.
If we were truly trying to just win a ring the next two years with Harden, I would do #4,#20,Christopher,2024 Nets pick+Tate+KMJ for Anuoby and Siakam. Then trade KPJ and Garuba for Harden in an SnT. If Harding was open to a reasonable deal, that would probably leave enough room for us to trade the 2026 pack back to Brooklyn for Claxton. Granted paying all those guys after 2025 isnt feasible. Claxton/Sengun Siakam/Smith Anuoby/Eason Green Harden/Washington While a good team, is still not a competitor. I think that is about the best stab we could take it immediately contending, but is also a good example of why we need to continue down the road that we are doing and be mostly homegrown.
