About to be a minutes crunch

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
PtldPlatypus said:
Which of the outgoing players do you actually consider to be an asset? They all feel like throwaways to me.
Click to expand...
They could be assets just as filler which would be needed to get a player like Siakam.
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
They could be assets just as filler which would be needed to get a player like Siakam.
Click to expand...
I guess we could still do that trade after my first trade if we switch Watford for Johnson. I need Johnson's higher salary for my Siakam for Simons, Little, Johnson, Walker and FRP's.
These two trades would leave us 4 players short but I'm sure we can figure that out.
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
I guess we could still do that trade after my first trade if we switch Watford for Johnson. I need Johnson's higher salary for my Siakam for Simons, Little, Johnson, Walker and FRP's.
These two trades would leave us 4 players short but I'm sure we can figure that out.
Click to expand...
Because of the hard cap and roster minimums, we probably wouldn't be able to figure that out. Hart or GP2 would likely have to be included in a Siakam deal to make it financially possible.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Because of the hard cap and roster minimums, we probably wouldn't be able to figure that out. Hart or GP2 would likely have to be included in a Siakam deal to make it financially possible.
Click to expand...
Well, what if we forget the Cleveland trade and trade Winslow, Simons and Little plus picks (might need an extra if they value Johnson or Walker). Then we are just short two. Same problem? Must be some other creative stuff to do. Find a club that has two guys at a million each and trade Watford to them.
 
Last edited:
PtldPlatypus said:
Because of the hard cap and roster minimums, we probably wouldn't be able to figure that out. Hart or GP2 would likely have to be included in a Siakam deal to make it financially possible.
Click to expand...
How badly do we want Siakam? Because the only way I see the Raptors trading him to us is if we include BOTH Anfernee and Sharpe:

upload_2023-1-16_13-2-49.png

This appears to favor us in the short term, (we would have about the best starting lineup since the Pippen years, or maybe the 82 games of Greg Oden) but I think we all have high hopes for Sharpe. It would stand a good chance of ending up like the Clippers giving up SGA to get Paul George.
 
Incidentally, Gary Trent has been on a tear for the Raptors of late:
upload_2023-1-16_13-4-42.png
Still doesn't contribute anything but shooting, though.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
How badly do we want Siakam? Because the only way I see the Raptors trading him to us is if we include BOTH Anfernee and Sharpe:

View attachment 52938

This appears to favor us in the short term, (we would have about the best starting lineup since the Pippen years, or maybe the 82 games of Greg Oden) but I think we all have high hopes for Sharpe. It would stand a good chance of ending up like the Clippers giving up SGA to get Paul George.
Click to expand...
I don't want him that bad. If he is so great, how come his team sucks? Give them enough picks and I think they will go for it!
 
Rastapopoulos said:
How badly do we want Siakam? Because the only way I see the Raptors trading him to us is if we include BOTH Anfernee and Sharpe:

View attachment 52938

This appears to favor us in the short term, (we would have about the best starting lineup since the Pippen years, or maybe the 82 games of Greg Oden) but I think we all have high hopes for Sharpe. It would stand a good chance of ending up like the Clippers giving up SGA to get Paul George.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I'd rather have OG (assuming he'd cost Simons and not Sharpe). Especially considering the argument that both Siakam and Grant are best at the 4, meaning one would have to play out of position. Hart/OG/Grant would be a killer 2-3-4.
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
I don't want him that bad. If he is so great, how come his team sucks? Give them enough picks and I think they will go for it!
Click to expand...

Don't want to give away our future as well. I'd prefer to keep our picks as much as possible.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
How badly do we want Siakam? Because the only way I see the Raptors trading him to us is if we include BOTH Anfernee and Sharpe:
Click to expand...

That was my initial thought as well. They would want Sharpe both from a talent perspective and because he is from the area. That is important because not every player wants to stay in Toronto long-term. I think that is the only way we would be in the running for Siakam.

They would not need Ant when they have Trent and Van Vleet, but I bet they would take Hart and Nurk. I love Hart but Siakam is worth it. Nurk would be a big loss but we would not need his offense if we had Siakam, Grant, Dame, and Ant. However, if we are talking short-term success then we would need a replacement for Nurk immediately.
 
GrandpaBlaze said:
Don't want to give away our future as well. I'd prefer to keep our picks as much as possible.
Click to expand...
Well, for me, the plan seems to be building around Lillard and going for all the marbles. If not then we need to trade Lillard and blow it up.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Honestly, I'd rather have OG (assuming he'd cost Simons and not Sharpe). Especially considering the argument that both Siakam and Grant are best at the 4, meaning one would have to play out of position. Hart/OG/Grant would be a killer 2-3-4.
Click to expand...
Do you think Grant is best at the four? We usually have him defending guards. Siakam weighs about 30 more pounds.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
They would not need Ant when they have Trent and Van Vleet, but I bet they would take Hart and Nurk. I love Hart but Siakam is worth it. Nurk would be a big loss but we would not need his offense if we had Siakam, Grant, Dame, and Ant. However, if we are talking short-term success then we would need a replacement for Nurk immediately.
Click to expand...
Funny, I would rather give Anfernee than Hart and Nurk. If the goal is to make a contender around Dame then giving up Hart and Nurk destroys your lineup. But trade Anfernee and you have an incredibly balanced lineup of Dame, Hart, Jerami, Siakam, Nurk. Both forwards can play both forward spots, both can shoot, both are plus defenders. We're switchable and big. Downside is, who's our backup PG? Keon? Might have to start Payton at the SG and have Hart be the do-it-all sixth man (à la Ainge for the Drexler teams or Manu Ginobili, coming off the bench behind Danny Green).

As for Toronto not WANTING Ant because they already have GT2 - I get the impression he's out the door. Basically they're rebuilding around Scottie Barnes (and OG, I think) and Anfernee fits fine with that.
 
tlongII said:
Just don’t trade Sharpe. That kid is insanely talented.
Click to expand...
Best case scenario: he'll get good just in time to replace Dame as Dame retires never having made the finals.

But I know what you mean: he's got perhaps the prettiest shot on the team and Vince Carter-level hops. BUT: can he play basketball? He's just learning. One thing's for sure, if we trade him, he'll turn into a superstar. But if we keep him, maybe he's just Andrew Wiggins without the defense?
 
Last edited:
Rastapopoulos said:
Best case scenario: he'll get good just in time to replace Dame as Dame retires never having made the finals.
Click to expand...
That's your best case??

My best case is that Shaedon breaks out while Dame is still priming. Next year might be the year..
 
I don’t see a huge market for an undersized score only centric guard. Teams with two guards that small and unable to defend are not good teams
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Funny, I would rather give Anfernee than Hart and Nurk. If the goal is to make a contender around Dame then giving up Hart and Nurk destroys your lineup. But trade Anfernee and you have an incredibly balanced lineup of Dame, Hart, Jerami, Siakam, Nurk. Both forwards can play both forward spots, both can shoot, both are plus defenders. We're switchable and big. Downside is, who's our backup PG? Keon? Might have to start Payton at the SG and have Hart be the do-it-all sixth man (à la Ainge for the Drexler teams or Manu Ginobili, coming off the bench behind Danny Green).

As for Toronto not WANTING Ant because they already have GT2 - I get the impression he's out the door. Basically they're rebuilding around Scottie Barnes (and OG, I think) and Anfernee fits fine with that.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but when you are trading for a star like Siakam, it really isn't what you want to give up but rather what they want in return, because they will have plenty of other offers to consider. But if you are right about Trent, and they trade him in s separate deal, then that could change. Still comes down to do we want to give up on Sharpe for a possible mal content. Will Siakam be a problem?
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
Doesn't seem to be a problem for his coach; he plays him 40 minutes a lot of nights.
Click to expand...

Yep, and he had another nice stat line today despite being 0-7 from deep.
20 points, 9 rebounds, 8 assists, 3 blocks, 1 TO in 46 minutes

So the question is why get rid of him? If there is no issue then they won't. If he does not want to be there, will he want to be in Portland? I have no idea....just asking
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top