- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 6/10/24 at 8:36 am to NOSHAU
quote:
What any teams' fans are willing to trade or accept is completely irrelevant to a players value. It is always biased and many times irrational.
When we as fans have a player we know is going to be traded, it helps to look at what other teams fans assess that players value at, then take your fans assessed value and go somewhere in the middle, and that’s usually around the league’s value.
It definitely is biased because of course every fan will think they’re player is worth more than a player on another team, so that’s why I try to go rationally and look in the middle
If we would actually know what sort of offers are being made then we could assess a little easier, but all we really have to go off of with that is knowing Griff could’ve sent him out last offseason for Brandon Miller or Scoot, but chose not to (mistake)
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 8:38 am
Posted on 6/10/24 at 8:39 am to saints5021
quote:
I believe they are the team we are talking with. Garland / Allen for BI / young players/picks works out for both teams.
The only young player I would add would be Dyson.
We have no reason to add anyone else, Ingram IMO has more value than Garland, but lets say they are a wash, Dyson, Nance and a pick or two is fair value for Allen. If we do go that route and give up more than that, I’ll be pissed
Posted on 6/10/24 at 8:43 am to Soggymoss
10 more days or so and then we should start to see things starting to simmer a bit.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 8:48 am to Pels_Yaz
I just want to point out that nothing from the Pelicans has said we are looking to trade BI.
All that’s really been reported is that we aren’t offering a max contract. The hope is to resign BI, just to a lower extension amount.
Will Guillory has a nice article about why not to trade BI here
I think I was on the trade BI no matter what train for a while, but over the last week or so I’m leaning more towards just keeping him.
That’s just a few excerpts. It was a good read.
All that’s really been reported is that we aren’t offering a max contract. The hope is to resign BI, just to a lower extension amount.
Will Guillory has a nice article about why not to trade BI here
I think I was on the trade BI no matter what train for a while, but over the last week or so I’m leaning more towards just keeping him.
quote:
But I have one question for everyone who has been so active on the trade machine over the past month: Is there a way for the Pelicans to trade Ingram and come away from that deal a better team than they were with the group that won 49 games this season? I’m not convinced. While the Ingram-Williamson duo has been far from perfect since each arrived in the summer of 2018, they showed their potential this season as a tandem once they finally were healthy enough to play together for extended stretches. They looked even more dangerous once Williamson locked in during the second half of the season, at least until Ingram’s bone bruise in late March.
quote:
Even though Ingram was awful against the Thunder in this year’s postseason, assuming he’s the wrong guy to put next to Williamson long-term seems shortsighted after all the progress he’s shown in previous seasons.
quote:
And, again, it’s hard to see how any of the potential Ingram deals often suggested in recent weeks return a player of his caliber to improve New Orleans on the court.
That’s just a few excerpts. It was a good read.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 8:49 am to Pels_Yaz
quote:
They would. And that trade is complete shite for BI. The draft is pretty bad- Ivey is probably the best asset in that package and he hasn’t been great.
Two good young players and a top 5 pick is more than Toronto got for Siakam. Just saying.
Does it look like a great trade when you just look at it from the vacuum of Pels/Pistons trade? Not at all, but if you look at other angles where saving 14 million and being able to expand the deal to add more teams and being in more pieces, it starts to look far more attractive. You could expand the trade to the point where you send out Dyson with 21 and a future 1st to Cleveland for Allen, then call Atlanta and swap Ivey and another future protected 1st for Murray. Have Detroit take in Nance which I think they would happily do, Trajan would love his mentorship.
Instead of looking at deals in a vacuum you also need to take into account subsequent deals that one trade can open up for you.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 8:52 am to TeddyPadillac
Even if we don’t return a player of his caliber and just get back 2-3 players that fit better, I think we will still be a better team. Griff really alluded to it in his PC, he said you need star players but those players have to fit together. That screams him saying Ingram doesn’t fit, especially after raving about how CJ changed his game and shot profile to better fit next to Zion.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 8:59 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
I think I was on the trade BI no matter what train for a while, but over the last week or so I’m leaning more towards just keeping him.
I'm not trading him just to trade him, but I think Murray is a fit upgrade and a talent lateral move. Trae I think is a swing you take because it's hard to see another path where you get an actual talent upgrade that fits with Zion. Garland, I see why he's in this group on paper, but I'm kind of iffy on him. He's the one I'd have to talk myself into the most.
Now if you can't get any of those 3 or a surprise candidate like Fox, I can see keeping BI, especially if he takes a discount. BUT, and this is a huge BUT, the Pels lost so many games due to lack of ball handling in the starting lineup. That's not going away if you keep BI and it was a huge weakness against the teams you need to beat to get far in the playoffs. Shamit has also pointed out that BI and Zion are often guarded by similar sized players which makes a 2 man game with them designed to get switches not all that useful vs. what a 2 man game with say Trae and Zion would look like.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 9:07 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
I just want to point out that nothing from the Pelicans has said we are looking to trade BI.
All that’s really been reported is that we aren’t offering a max contract. The hope is to resign BI, just to a lower extension amount.
You're right, but I feel like logically because we have heard they aren't offering a max the only real option left is a trade. BI isn't taking less than the max. I would hope the team isn't even wasting their time entertaining that.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 9:27 am to Soggymoss
quote:Yeah, I know it depends on the market, but Garland has a pretty steep contract for what he offers IMO. So I would think that BI, Nance and a pick should be enough for Garland and Allen (without including Dyson). Depends on how much SA likes Garland.
The only young player I would add would be Dyson.
We have no reason to add anyone else, Ingram IMO has more value than Garland, but lets say they are a wash, Dyson, Nance and a pick or two is fair value for Allen. If we do go that route and give up more than that, I’ll be pissed
Posted on 6/10/24 at 10:20 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
But I have one question for everyone who has been so active on the trade machine over the past month: Is there a way for the Pelicans to trade Ingram and come away from that deal a better team than they were with the group that won 49 games this season? I’m not convinced.
The only way you wouldn't be convinced of this is if you didn't trust in Trey taking a step in a starting role (especially with his injury last year on that 49-win team).
Also, assuming we got back a defensive 5 (since Willie is the biggest variable holding us back, not BI, wasting "home runs" like Dawkins last year out of stubbornness).
Posted on 6/10/24 at 10:25 am to Soggymoss
quote:
I’m seeing alot of Detroit fans saying they would be fine with paying Ivey, Stewart and the 5th pick for Ingram. That to me is around what his value will end up at so I maybe undervaluing him. I’m willing to bet they wouldn’t even send the 5th pick for Murray by himself.
Completely agree.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 10:25 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
I think I was on the trade BI no matter what train for a while, but over the last week or so I’m leaning more towards just keeping him.
Fans will talk themselves in and out of anything.
The only, ONLY reasons to do that is:
1) The offers you are getting are truly, ACTUALLY terrible (not David Griffin "I must win this trade going away" terrible, but actually terrible
AND
2) BI is signing a well below market contract that actually helps his future value
Otherwise you have to move on. You have to reassemble this roster.
And that means you have to trade other players to make this work better. You cannot go into another year standing pat
Posted on 6/10/24 at 10:51 am to Soggymoss
quote:
The only young player I would add would be Dyson. We have no reason to add anyone else, Ingram IMO has more value than Garland, but lets say they are a wash, Dyson, Nance and a pick or two is fair value for Allen. If we do go that route and give up more than that, I’ll be pissed
This would just piss me off so bad, considering if Griff knew what he was doing, he would have drafted Garland and could have traded for Allen if he didn’t stupidly make the Adams trade and was more patient.
And now hes going to not only give up BI but someone like DD for two players that shoukd be on the roster already.
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 10:52 am
Posted on 6/10/24 at 11:02 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
You cannot go into another year standing pat
i whole heartedly agree.
Would you be ok with resigning BI to 4/$195, which starts at $43M next year, and moving CJ for an upgrade at the PG position? What is the number, and trade scenario to get better if we keep BI in your eyes?
So how do we get better if BI stays, without even thinking about the salary situation, just from a roster perspective, how do we get better?
If BI stays, then adding a 3rd star (one that scores) makes no sense b/c you don't get to maximize that 3rd player, whether that 3rd player is BI or the one you bring in. you saw it with Chris Bosh, and you see the PHX big 3 not working at all either. The ideal team has two guys doing the majority of the scoring, and then 2 other guys capable of giving you big nights but also are accepting in their role as the 3rd and 4th guy. I think CJ and Trey fit that 3rd and 4th guy really well. The question is, is BI the right #2 guy. This team as currently constructed, the answer is no.
So if BI stays, who needs to be traded? to me the answer is CJ/Herb, and I think it would be stupid to trade Herb. But if you move CJ, what are you looking for to get back? a true PG that doesn't mind playing off the ball at times and being more of a 12-15ppg guy that is going to play good defense? Who is that? Is that Dejounte Murray, b/c I don't think it is as he only seems effective with the ball in his hands.
Does Jalen Suggs provide that somewhat? He doesn't have the gravity that CJ does from the 3 point line, nor is he anythign near a typical PG, but is he a better fit at PG than CJ with a BI/Zion lineup?
Are we a better team if we were to trade CJ to the Magic for Suggs/Isaac, and then did a S&T to bring in Claxton for Larry? I really like CJ and he without a doubt won us a bunch of games by himself this year, but his defense is a big problem in the playoffs. And him winning us games usually is b/c one of BI or Zion wasn't playing and he stepped up. When BI and Zion are playing well together, CJ is just a really expensive role player off the ball that is thriving b/c all of the attention is on BI and Zion.
I'm not sure of another available PG you'd like to pair up with BI/Zion to replace CJ.
Now if you trade BI, what are you looking to get back? to me if you don't get a similar level scorer, then we simply won't be a better team. We may win more regular season games, but as a playoff team, I don't think we can advance without someone like BI as our #2, or better.
Dejounte Murray isn't a #2. I like him, but the more i look at it, would i rather just keep BI than trade him for Murray? If Murray comes here and we don't improve and we need to move him for an upgrade, his value will be even lower than it is right now. So saying just do that trade anyway from a salary perspective seems silly to me, b/c Murray won't have any value if he doesn't do well here even with his much lower salary.
Is Garland at least a similar scorer as BI? maybe, but he can't play in the same backcourt as CJ. So now you're trading BI and CJ. And I also don't think Garland would be utlized to his fullest if we were able to trade CJ for him and have Garland/BI/Zion.
The only answer to me in a trade for BI is to trade him for Trae or Fox or similar. Trading him for quarters just doesn't make us better next year. Now if you're plan was to maybe not be so great next year ( not great as in still finishing with a winning record) and waiting to use the assets you have and acquired for a superstar, then I can maybe get behind that. But that is risky and not guaranteed, and you can't keep waiting for it to happen.
BI is our #2. He's a scorer, and you can bitch all you want about his mid range shot selection, he's a legit upper tier scorer in the nba, and you have to have that to win in the playoffs. IF we can't get that back in a trade for him, we simply aren't getting better.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 12:12 pm to TeddyPadillac
quote:
he's a legit upper tier scorer in the nba, and you have to have that to win in the playoffs
This is why I’m Trae or bust and anyone and anything is on the table to get him besides Zion and Trey, within reason of course.
We have a coach that has shown he can scheme a defense, but doesn’t know a damn thing about offense. Get him an offensive guy that’s a system all by himself to help out there. If we can’t score points I don’t care who we put on the floor, we are not winning shite. I would much prefer winning a game 140-135 than losing a game 105-100.
If Atlanta doesn’t want to move Trae right now, then get pieces you can use in a Trae trade later while still keeping yourself competitive now, even if we take a slight step back.
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 12:14 pm
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:59 pm to Soggymoss
quote:If Hawks do not want to move Trae now, you move on. They have the #1 pick and all indications are that they will use that and a trade of a player (Murray?) to build around Trae.
If Atlanta doesn’t want to move Trae right now, then get pieces you can use in a Trae trade later while still keeping yourself competitive now, even if we take a slight step back.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 2:16 pm to Soggymoss
quote:
I would much prefer winning a game 140-135 than losing a game 105-100.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 2:20 pm to NOSHAU
quote:
If Hawks do not want to move Trae now, you move on. They have the #1 pick and all indications are that they will use that and a trade of a player (Murray?) to build around Trae.
Bill Simmons on his latest pod said his sources are telling him Atlanta will be moving both Trae and Murray and doing a full rebuild. They really can go in any direction.
However even if we don’t use those pieces later in a Trae trade, we can always use them for the next star that demands a trade.
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 6/10/24 at 2:20 pm to Soggymoss
quote:
The only young player I would add would be Dyson
I personally would rather trade away in this order:
24' 1st
25' 1st
26' 1st
Jose
Dyson
Hawk
Page 69 of 86
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News