If CJ were to be traded, who are we most likely to get?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I think somebody said this already, but yeh, why are there not even rumors out there about this team or that team wanting CJ?
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
I think somebody said this already, but yeh, why are there not even rumors out there about this team or that team wanting CJ?
Click to expand...

when is there ever? Just using the most recent example, was there one report about Roco to Portland before it happened?
 
illmatic99 said:
why would washington do that
Click to expand...
Well, if it were Nas included instead of DJJ, they'd do it to get a 2-guard who isn't publicly desiring an exit without massively downgrading, and to add another young wing.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Well, if it were Nas included instead of DJJ, they'd do it to get a 2-guard who isn't publicly desiring an exit without massively downgrading, and to add another young wing.
Click to expand...
i would think if washington trades Beal, the smart thing would be exactly what we would do if Dame leaves in a trade : tear down completely.

CJ does not fit into that at all.
 
illmatic99 said:
i would think if washington trades Beal, the smart thing would be exactly what we would do if Dame leaves in a trade : tear down completely.

CJ does not fit into that at all.
Click to expand...
They're stuck with Westbrook for two more years, and have Bryant coming back, and expect significant growth from Hachimura and Avdija. I'm sure if they replaced Beal with CJ, they'd expect to be able to compete.
 
illmatic99 said:
i would think if washington trades Beal, the smart thing would be exactly what we would do if Dame leaves in a trade : tear down completely.

CJ does not fit into that at all.
Click to expand...
They're stuck with WestBrick's crazy contract for a while. Mine as well compete.
 
upload_2021-7-29_12-20-20.png

A lot of choices at #9 - maybe take Duarte or reach for a sure-fire contributor in Garuba.

The kings want to get better NOW and are also rumored to be trading Buddy to the Lakers. Let's nip that in the bud. (Plus they are one of the teams that the Blazers supposedly "beat out" in signing Jones, suggesting that they might actually see him as more than a throw-in.)

I think this trade makes a lot of sense for both teams. Granted it leaves the Blazers without a clear #2 player (and might piss Dame off for that reason) but it also really strengthens the squad and gives us a shot at a really good young player. Meanwhile the Kings avoid fucking up yet another draft. But they'd better hurry...
 
That's an easy yes for me, but can't see Sacramento doing it.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
View attachment 39895

A lot of choices at #9 - maybe take Duarte or reach for a sure-fire contributor in Garuba.

The kings want to get better NOW and are also rumored to be trading Buddy to the Lakers. Let's nip that in the bud. (Plus they are one of the teams that the Blazers supposedly "beat out" in signing Jones, suggesting that they might actually see him as more than a throw-in.)

I think this trade makes a lot of sense for both teams. Granted it leaves the Blazers without a clear #2 player (and might piss Dame off for that reason) but it also really strengthens the squad and gives us a shot at a really good young player. Meanwhile the Kings avoid fucking up yet another draft. But they'd better hurry...
Click to expand...
I would try to swing 9 to Toronto to pick up Siakam.

Don't see Sac doing that though. There is a very clear difference between Hield and CJ, but it's not Barnes + 9.
 
illmatic99 said:
I would try to swing 9 to Toronto to pick up Siakam.
Click to expand...

If that was possible then Sacramento would do it and we wouldn't get this trade.

illmatic99 said:
Don't see Sac doing that though. There is a very clear difference between Hield and CJ, but it's not Barnes + 9.
Click to expand...
If they don't want to give us Barnes, then:
upload_2021-7-29_12-36-21.png

...but we'd have to really like the player we're targeting at #9. And I don't trust Olshey with picks in that range (Meyers, Zach)...
 
Rastapopoulos said:
If they don't want to give us Barnes, then:
View attachment 39896

...but we'd have to really like the player we're targeting at #9. And I don't trust Olshey with picks in that range (Meyers, Zach)...
Click to expand...
i would do that. It has a similar feel to my three team idea with CHA/IND yesterday. Get a starter level player and a lotto pick for CJ that we then use to land another impact player like Siakam.
 
If Norm is here, I don't give a shit about getting Buddy Hield. We already have the CJ replacement apparent in Norm and the backup in Ant. So that's just not a piece I'm interested in.
 
wizenheimer said:
how about just CJ for Barnes and #9. If Norm re-signs there's no reason for Hield
Click to expand...
Hmm. I think I like CJ better than that. Barnes is a solid enough role-player but
(a) Buddy can get super-hot and get you points in bunches, and
(b) Part of the point is to stop the Lakers getting Buddy!
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Hmm. I think I like CJ better than that. Barnes is a solid enough role-player but
(a) Buddy can get super-hot and get you points in bunches, and
(b) Part of the point is to stop the Lakers getting Buddy!
Click to expand...
I wouldn't ever make a move for a player at a position that we are stacked up at (scoring guard) to block the Lakers. That is some short sited shit. Focus on doing what we do and especially on keeping Dame, not on potential Lakers moves.

I would be cool with Barnes, Wright and #9 for CJ, if we either have a second trade partner that will take the ninth pick to help us upgrade a help now position or we have identified someone at #9 that would help us right now.

I don't know if what Sac has moves the needle in the way that would make Dame stay but I think we have until at least mid season to prove that to him.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Screw Barnes or Hield--get me Bagley, Wright, and 9.
Click to expand...
Nice one. solves a few problems with legit 4 and true backup PG. Though like others have said I am also wary of trusting Olshey with a top 10 pick. Has to get it right this time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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