Batum is the true value chip

[PtldPlatypus]

This is the thing. Batum is a 10 mil player. We have around 11 mil in cap space. We could actually use batum, maybe a couple other players and the cap space to obtain a high profile player of a team that wants to she'd cap space and still have a potential "high profile" player in return.

What are you thinking, like a Paul Pierce?

 

[Pinwheel1]

Aldridge + batum for harden and asik?

I understand that the next 3 months before the draft is going to be tough to bare. Trade scenarios with extremely low probability are going to appear daily just to breakup the monotony and to give some of you something to discuss. And there is nothing wrong with that. I will just try my best to ignore them.....for my own sanity.

 

[KeepOnRollin]

What are you thinking, like a Paul Pierce?

At Paul Pierce's age next year how is he an improvement over Batum?

 

[magnifier661]

What are you thinking, like a Paul Pierce?

I was thinking of a younger player. I like that guard from golden state. Don't know why I can't remember his name. He's still on his rookie deal; so we'd have to take on another contract.

 

[Hobbesarable]

I was thinking of a younger player. I like that guard from golden state. Don't know why I can't remember his name. He's still on his rookie deal; so we'd have to take on another contract.

Curry?

 

[Pinwheel1]

I was thinking of a younger player. I like that guard from golden state. Don't know why I can't remember his name. He's still on his rookie deal; so we'd have to take on another contract.

Clay Thomson? Michael's boy?

 

[Rhal]

There are a couple of problems with just "trading" batum to trade him. First is he is the second best ball handler on the starting unit, moving him means we would need get someone who can do the same thing. Second he has been injured for months. He was more aggressive scoring before the wrist injury (although he took a lot of threes) and the SG/SF positions are not very deep with versitile players like they used to be.
Bottom line is everyone should be up for trade but we shouldn't make a move to make a move. Moving any of our starters outside of hickson creates another hole we would then have to fill.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[magnifier661]

Clay Thomson? Michael's boy?

Yes Clay Thomson.

 

[OregonHuskerMan]

So, if I got this right...

You want to trade our second best "young" player Batum, for something else, to build around Lillard and Keep LMA (who is our oldest player, can also net more in return to help build around Damian?)

If you dedicate yourself to Lillard, you ship Aldridge off, and go for another youth movement.

Now after you trade Aldridge, and Batum still isn't producing how we would like, then maybe you trade him as well... But no way should we trade him before Aldridge.

And Harden/Asik for LMA/Batum is never happening. Never.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I was thinking of a younger player. I like that guard from golden state. Don't know why I can't remember his name. He's still on his rookie deal; so we'd have to take on another contract.

Thompson probably has more value than Batum does. They would have to really want to get rid of either Bogut, Jefferson, or Biedrins in order to make a deal like that, and since all three of those will be expiring contracts next year, I doubt that they would want to do so.

Sure a younger player would be great, but can you actually name me a younger player that is starter-caliber that another team would want to trade Batum for? If we're looking at trading Batum--with his contract--it's going to have to be a potential-for-production kind of deal, where the other team sees Batum as a young guy who can still develop, and we're getting an older, possibly overpaid, player in return, who is better suited to help us win now.

That's really the only reason you trade Batum, IMO--for a win-now deal.

 

[magnifier661]

Thompson probably has more value than Batum does. They would have to really want to get rid of either Bogut, Jefferson, or Biedrins in order to make a deal like that, and since all three of those will be expiring contracts next year, I doubt that they would want to do so.

Sure a younger player would be great, but can you actually name me a younger player that is starter-caliber that another team would want to trade Batum for? If we're looking at trading Batum--with his contract--it's going to have to be a potential-for-production kind of deal, where the other team sees Batum as a young guy who can still develop, and we're getting an older, possibly overpaid, player in return, who is better suited to help us win now.

That's really the only reason you trade Batum, IMO--for a win-now deal.

That makes a lot of sense. So in other words; we want to win now; we trade for a vet or vets for batum. If we want to win for the future; we trade Aldridge?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

That makes a lot of sense. So in other words; we want to win now; we trade for a vet or vets for batum. If we want to win for the future; we trade Aldridge?

Assuming we're looking at trading either one, that's the way I see it. Batum fits a later window, Aldridge an earlier one.

Lillard is the window, so he works either way. Love that kid!! (I know we all do, I just wanted to say it again. )

 

[magnifier661]

Assuming we're looking at trading either one, that's the way I see it. Batum fits a later window, Aldridge an earlier one.

Lillard is the window, so he works either way. Love that kid!! (I know we all do, I just wanted to say it again. )

I wonder if the first 5 teams are kicking themselves?

 

[Pinwheel1]

I wonder if the first 5 teams are kicking themselves?

If I were 2-5 I would be. It will take injuries to Davis for N.O to kick themselves. He looks pretty good.

 

[Sinobas]

I don't see any improvement out of Batum this year. He's pretty much the same player he's always been. He'll wow you every once in awhile, but disappear twice as often. His defense is solid, not good, and his offense is mostly limited to 3 pointers.

He's a very solid starting wing, but over-paid. He's not a "difference maker" aside from the nights he's on fire from 3pt range. He's the Wesley Matthews of SFs.

 

[RoyToy]

Was Batum's wrist hurt in December when he shot 32% from 3 and 38.7% over from the field?

I guess people still don't realize that Batum is just a streaky player who every year gets hot for 2-3 weeks and everyone thinks that's his real level of play, when in reality it's just a hot streak. You'll always be a streaky player when you shoot nothing but 3's and long 2's because of almost no ability to create your own offense.

And the wrist injury is a lame excuse.

 

[RR7]

I personally find both Aldridge AND Batum to be ideal fits for Lillard. Batum's ability to create for others, before injury, was a big relief for Lillard, allowing him to play more off the balll, and eliminate some of his responsibilities. Batum is also a very good 3 point shooter, helping to spread the floor on kick outs.
Aldridge works well out of the post, where the offense can begin, with a kickout after, surrounded by good shooters. However, because he's not a liability away from the basket, like other big men, who can not shoot beyond 5 feet, he also gives spacing to Lillard, where you can have him out of the lane, improving drving opportunities for Dame, and not allowing his man to totally sag off, because he is a threat from out there.
Lillard this season pushed our window up, in my opinion. He's not someone who is 2-4 years still away, like many people want or think our window is. With a mroe reliable bench THIS season, I think we'd be in the 6-7 seed discussion. A year of improvement from him, Leonard, Claver, full season of Maynor, and hopefully good additions on the bench, I don't think it's at all out of the realm of possibility to challenge for a 4th seed next season.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I don't see any improvement out of Batum this year. He's pretty much the same player he's always been. He'll wow you every once in awhile, but disappear twice as often. His defense is solid, not good, and his offense is mostly limited to 3 pointers.

He's a very solid starting wing, but over-paid. He's not a "difference maker" aside from the nights he's on fire from 3pt range. He's the Wesley Matthews of SFs.

Just keep in mind we can play the game of strengths, and especially weaknesses, all day long with every single player in the league. The more we know of a player (Usually our own) the more ammo we have to find the weakness. SC highlights don't show those weaknesses of the players we all want to trade our players for, so as with most things in life the grass is always greener...... So in the end I doubt we will all be happy with who Nic is traded for.

Klay Thompson was mentioned as an option Let me get the ball rolling: great shooter, great size for a SG, not a great passer, not really that athletic and because of that.......not a good defender.

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

So the options last night were going deep into one of the weakest benches in recent NBA memory or Nic giving what he had despite not being 100%. Give Nic some credit.

If you are going to be this frustrated with inconsistent results, stop now with your McGee to Portland campaign Mags

 

[magnifier661]

So the options last night were going deep into one of the weakest benches in recent NBA memory or Nic giving what he had despite not being 100%. Give Nic some credit.

If you are going to be this frustrated with inconsistent results, stop now with your McGee to Portland campaign Mags

Actually I want consistency from the wing. Without it; teams can pack in and sag off batum. McGee, I would ask only to defend the paint; which I think he would be fine doing.