2013 Unrestricted Free Agents.

[RR7]

You know that's an unanswerable question.
But I've made it known that I'd like to pursue Monroe.

Technically it's unanswerable, sure. But you can provide examples of what you think is realistic or possible. It's easy to just say trade LMA for 4-5 assets, of which one is a sure thing, and a lot more difficult to actually show a deal like that, and a reason for the other team to do it.
I think we should trade JJ Hickson for a lottery pick. I think that would be the best move to rebuild our team. It's unanswerable to show who would give that to us, so I won't.

 

[magnifier661]

The Clippers could have easily been a successful team if Donald Sterling wasn't a cheap ass. The number of good players to be drafted by LAC is actually quite impressive, but Sterling never wanted to pay any of them. Who knows what changed his mind, but without Blake Griffin that team would still be a joke. I promise you. Regardless, the fact that they're in LA makes them an attractive destination.

Superstars don't want to play in Portland. The last superstar we traded for was Pippen, and he was in the twilight of his career. Roy was on the verge of being a superstar, I think, but we essentially drafted him.

See I don't believe that. I think we need a winning culture and we can have opportunity to get one. The irony of when you said the last time we got a superstar was right after we made it to the WCF. Usually superstars have made their money and are chasing success. You have a successful franchise and valuable players to trade, without losing your core; you are put in a good position to get that said superstar.

 

[Natebishop3]

See I don't believe that. I think we need a winning culture and we can have opportunity to get one. The irony of when you said the last time we got a superstar was right after we made it to the WCF. Usually superstars have made their money and are chasing success. You have a successful franchise and valuable players to trade, without losing your core; you are put in a good position to get that said superstar.

We got that superstar AFTER we had already been to one WCF. Trying to convince a superstar, or even an aging superstar, to join a team that hasn't made the playoffs in two years is a little bit harder to do. And superstars only start chasing success when they're nearing the end of their careers. We don't need aging stars, we need guys in their prime.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I think we should trade JJ Hickson for a lottery pick. I think that would be the best move to rebuild our team. It's unanswerable to show who would give that to us, so I won't.

If I am a lottery team I would not trade my pick for a UFA. I would rather keep it or trade for Terrance Jones, which Houston has been rumored to be offering.

JJ is not going to get us a lotto pick.

 

[magnifier661]

We got that superstar AFTER we had already been to one WCF. Trying to convince a superstar, or even an aging superstar, to join a team that hasn't made the playoffs in two years is a little bit harder to do. And superstars only start chasing success when they're nearing the end of their careers. We don't need aging stars, we need guys in their prime.

And? Haven't I been preaching that we must move forward and build a team to make the playoffs; while obtaining as much tradeable talent as possible? It may not happen this summer, but it could happen by the deadline. Maybe it happens next summer, maybe the summer after that? In the meantime, you big a team to win and make it past the first round. Then you have the pieces to grab the talent in the future.

 

[blue9]

Keep in mind that blue9 doesn't understand these entagibles.

You're right - I don't understand what an "entagibles" is at all. Please, mags.
LMA fits DET's timeline just as well as he fits ours. And everyone seems to think that every GM in the league would jump at the chance to acquire him.

 

[Hobbesarable]

Technically it's unanswerable, sure. But you can provide examples of what you think is realistic or possible. It's easy to just say trade LMA for 4-5 assets, of which one is a sure thing, and a lot more difficult to actually show a deal like that, and a reason for the other team to do it.
I think we should trade JJ Hickson for a lottery pick. I think that would be the best move to rebuild our team. It's unanswerable to show who would give that to us, so I won't.

Which NBA team is going to trade a lottery pick for Hickson when they can wait to give him an offer after this season?

 

[RR7]

If I am a lottery team I would not trade my pick for a UFA. I would rather keep it or trade for Terrance Jones, which Houston has been rumored to be offering.

JJ is not going to get us a lotto pick.

I know. Wasn't really serious with my comment. Was just using it as an example to show that just saying trade LMA for 4-5 assets isn't a great option without showing somewhat reasonable options. Otherwise, one can just say do X(JJ for lottto pick) and why make it realistic.

 

[magnifier661]

You're right - I don't understand what an "entagibles" is at all. Please, mags.
LMA fits DET's timeline just as well as he fits ours. And everyone seems to think that every GM in the league would jump at the chance to acquire him.

It's funny because you and zags have been trying to say how monroe is a better player than Aldridge; yet you just assume Detroit doesn't think so?

If you were Detroit and you have Monroe and Drummand, why would you trade them? They are very close in age and can grow together right? Also, you are detroit and assured a lotto pick this summer. They are at a different stage then we are. They won't be trading Monroe as much as our team will not trade Aldridge.

 

[RR7]

Which NBA team is going to trade a lottery pick for Hickson when they can wait to give him an offer after this season?

none of them. I was making a point about unanswerable trade requests.

 

[Hobbesarable]

It's funny because you and zags have been trying to say how monroe is a better player than Aldridge; yet you just assume Detroit doesn't think so?

If you were Detroit and you have Monroe and Drummand, why would you trade them? They are very close in age and can grow together right? Also, you are detroit and assured a lotto pick this summer. They are at a different stage then we are. They won't be trading Monroe as much as our team will not trade Aldridge.

I wouldn't trade for LA if I were Detroit.

 

[blue9]

My post was more about detailing what I feel LMA's value is, not about specifics. Do you disagree on the general value of LMA?
I'm not going to whip my Monroe idea all day, every day. I'd like to hear what other people would like to see in return for LMA. I thought setting a general valuation for him would be a way to get some trade ideas.
Unfortunately I agree when people say that it won't happen. But just because it most likely won't happen doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, or that it's not worth discussing. If more and more people discuss it as a possibility it's more likely to seep through the fan-base and make it easier for management to cut him loose...that whole "if you say it enough it becomes true" phenomenon.

 

[magnifier661]

My post was more about detailing what I feel LMA's value is, not about specifics. Do you disagree on the general value of LMA?
I'm not going to whip my Monroe idea all day, every day. I'd like to hear what other people would like to see in return for LMA. I thought setting a general valuation for him would be a way to get some trade ideas.
Unfortunately I agree when people say that it won't happen. But just because it most likely won't happen doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, or that it's not worth discussing. If more and more people discuss it as a possibility it's more likely to seep through the fan-base and make it easier for management to cut him loose...that whole "if you say it enough it becomes true" phenomenon.

Offer something that has a chance of happening and the forum will make their opinions. But any scenario involving Aldridge is a waste of time. Just like Batum and Lillard. Using all the other players are absolutely available.

 

[RR7]

Value is determined by what it would take to get rid of something, and what someone would be willing to give you for it. Ideally, the second exceeds the first. But that's unlikely.
4-5 assets with a "sure thing" as one? I suppose. But that's why I said show me. I don't see where a 5 asset deal with a sure thing exists for LMA. That might be the value it'd take for me to get rid of LMA, but that's unlikely to be the value another team would move for him. So I don't realistically see it happening.

 

[Hobbesarable]

Offer something that has a chance of happening and the forum will make their opinions. But any scenario involving Aldridge is a waste of time. Just like Batum and Lillard. Using all the other players are absolutely available.

Then don't expect a meaningful trade to happen by the trade deadline.

 

[magnifier661]

Then don't expect a meaningful trade to happen by the trade deadline.

Personally I don't think we will have a meaningful trade by deadline. I think most our action will happen this summer.