Josh Hart trade rumors

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Josh Hart has spent most of his career at SF

upload_2023-1-30_7-48-16.png

obviously, those positional assignments are full of flux and interpretation. But still he's spent a lot of time at SF, even before Portland. "You are what you can defend", and Hart is a fairly versatile defender.

the NBA has essentially evolved to 3 on floor positions: PG's, Wings, and C's; and often, teams don't have C's on the floor. Hart is a wing, and generally, he's a little undersized as a wing, but he doesn't play undersized; 8 rebounds a game is impressive, especially when added to 4 assists a game with a 12.5% usage rate and an assist/turnover ratio close to 2.7. That's why there seems to be so much interest in him

and the contrast with Hart is why Ant's value is limited. He only a PG, sometimes, by default because his team doesn't have anything better. He simply doesn't have the court vision or timing of a PG; not yet at least. So, he's a SG who can't really be a wing because he's way too undersized for wing and he can't defend a chair. A SG who is extremely limited at wing really needs to have a consistent and dynamic game to have good value (think Donovan Mitchell), especially if his PG skills only elevate him to 'tweener guard' level.

that is Portland's major puzzle...Hart is much better at the things he does than Ant is at what he does. And Hart is capable of plugging into a lot of teams in a lot of positions in a lot of situations. Ant is quite limited while playing on a pretty substantial contract considering those limitations

I've been reluctant to say Ant 'should' be traded. I wanted to see how he fit the roster and didn't think he could show all that in half a season. But Portland is underachieving while being wildly inconsistent, and Ant is part of that. There's a CJ problem, but I don't mean the match with Dame. I mean the actual trade value of CJ was a hell of a lot less than many thought, and that's because CJ had the same limitations that Ant has. If Ant is traded, and I don't expect it, I suspect he's going to be traded for a lot less than some people are imagining. And with Hart's contract status, I'd expect his return, if he's traded, will be disappointing too.
 
My prediction is Hart is the only deal done at the deadline. Probably won't net a huge return, hopefully a center long and athletic and fast
 
Cugel said:
My prediction is Hart is the only deal done at the deadline. Probably won't net a huge return, hopefully a center long and athletic and fast
Click to expand...

Probably trade him to Detroit for Nerlens Noel
 
I have zero faith that Too Slow Joe will pull off any kind of solid deal at the deadline.
 
Ed O said:
NBA teams get better every time Hart leaves... the Lakers won 15 more games the year after he left and New Orleans crawled back into the playoffs after the Blazers got him. It might be coincidence, but no playoff appearances in five years doesn't really speak well to him contributing to winning basketball at this level.

Basically: he's just a guy. If we can get any value for him, we should do so.
Click to expand...

Spot on. Would you ever see him as starter on any team with championship aspirations? No.

The only players we have that would fit on truly championship-oriented team are Dame, Ant, Shaeden, Jerami, and excuse me, Nurk (every championship team needs a hulking guy like that.)

Hart, Winslow, Drew, etc - all expendable.
 
Stevenson said:
Spot on. Would you ever see him as starter on any team with championship aspirations? No.

The only players we have that would fit on truly championship-oriented team are Dame, Ant, Shaeden, Jerami, and excuse me, Nurk (every championship team needs a hulking guy like that.)

Hart, Winslow, Drew, etc - all expendable.
Click to expand...

As others alluded to, the Lakers traded 3 players for Anthony Davis but still had Lebron who recruited others. Of course, they got better. As for New Orleans yeah they got better because they had injuries and no point guard after they traded Ball. Hart was playing 4 different positions for them because of injuries.
He was a winner in college and most teams want a guy like Hart on their team....even if it is off the bench.
 
Mr. Robot said:
@wizenheimer how relevant is DRPM statistic
Click to expand...

it used to be better but about 3 years ago they changed the way it was calculated

upload_2023-1-30_14-25-42.png

seems a lot noisier and prone to outliers now, and like any stat, it needs to be viewed along with other stats that supposedly gauge the same thing. Defensive stats are rather unreliable anyway, and they tend to overvalue guys who live in the paint (10 of the top 12 in DRPM are bigs)

if this is about Nurkic, he's a good defender but he sure isn't the 6th best defender in the league.
 
BlazerBender said:
Whaa??? Wasnt one of the biggest gripe last year that he made the first trade a week early and should have waited?

now he is too slow joe???

this place… lol.
Click to expand...

LOL... you nailed this one.

The need to complain is greater than the need to have a legit reason to complain.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
As others alluded to, the Lakers traded 3 players for Anthony Davis but still had Lebron who recruited others. Of course, they got better. As for New Orleans yeah they got better because they had injuries and no point guard after they traded Ball. Hart was playing 4 different positions for them because of injuries.
He was a winner in college and most teams want a guy like Hart on their team....even if it is off the bench.
Click to expand...
It is entirely possible that the excuses are right, and that what he did in terms of winning about a decade ago is more relevant than his entire NBA career.

It doesn't seem likely, but I suppose it's possible.
 
The Lakers were 26-56 before they drafted Josh Hart. They improved to 35-47, and then to 37-45 in his 2 seasons there.
The Pelicans were 33-49 before trading for Josh Hart. A .402 winning percentage. The following year they went 30-42, for a .417 winning percentage. They followed that up by going 31-41. A .431 winning percentage.
Everywhere Josh Hart goes, his teams get better! Who needs context for anything, right?
 
RR7 said:
The Lakers were 26-56 before they drafted Josh Hart. They improved to 35-47, and then to 37-45 in his 2 seasons there.
The Pelicans were 33-49 before trading for Josh Hart. A .402 winning percentage. The following year they went 30-42, for a .417 winning percentage. They followed that up by going 31-41. A .431 winning percentage.
Everywhere Josh Hart goes, his teams get better! Who needs context for anything, right?
Click to expand...
That's not context.

Are you saying that the teams would have been even better when keeping Hart? Or did you pay attention to what actually happened after he was traded both places?

Do you think the Hornets would have made the playoffs last year without making the trade that shipped him out? Or that they'd be over .500 this year without making that trade?

"Context" doesn't matter if it doesn't actually change the argument.
 
People should talk about how Winslow is a winner, too. And GP III.

All of the "winners" we have on a sub-.500 team is amazing.
 
Ed O said:
That's not context.

Are you saying that the teams would have been even better when keeping Hart? Or did you pay attention to what actually happened after he was traded both places?

Do you think the Hornets would have made the playoffs last year without making the trade that shipped him out? Or that they'd be over .500 this year without making that trade?

"Context" doesn't matter if it doesn't actually change the argument.
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to make predictions on what would or could have happened with the teams. Straight facts. The Lakewrs improved once he got there, and the years he was there. The Pelicans did the same. Are you saying my numbers are wrong?
 
RR7 said:
I'm not trying to make predictions on what would or could have happened with the teams. Straight facts. The Lakewrs improved once he got there, and the years he was there. The Pelicans did the same. Are you saying my numbers are wrong?
Click to expand...

I think the argument Ed is making is that while they may have improved slightly while he was there, each of the teams improved more once they traded him away.

If Portland trades him and gets a better fit in return, it could also fit into the same narrative.

Ed, correct me if I'm putting incorrect words in your mouth.
 
GrandpaBlaze said:
I think the argument Ed is making is that while they may have improved slightly while he was there, each of the teams improved more once they traded him away.

If Portland trades him and gets a better fit in return, it could also fit into the same narrative.

Ed, correct me if I'm putting incorrect words in your mouth.
Click to expand...
For sure. I understand. But Ed is dismissing context and saying "excuses" for what transpired. As others pointed out, yes, the Lakers got better, they traded for Anthony fucking Davis! When a team trades pieces for a super star, they often get better. It's extremely stupid to attribute that getting better to just being rid of Josh Hart. There's addition by subtraction, and that's almost what Ed wanted to say happens, by pointing out teams get better when he leaves, without the context of, they traded for Anthony Davis! So if we can make claims on teams getting better when he leaves, I can likewise point out that teams got better when he was there.
 
Ed O said:
It is entirely possible that the excuses are right, and that what he did in terms of winning about a decade ago is more relevant than his entire NBA career.

It doesn't seem likely, but I suppose it's possible.
Click to expand...

I was being a bit sarcastic about winning "in college" because I found the whole "contributing to winning basketball at this level" a little ridiculous.
 
I think the problem is, Hart can't really shoot. Once in a while, sure. But just from watching him play consistently, he has no confidence and would rather pass it off unless he has an open lane.
 
C_note said:
I think the problem is, Hart can't really shoot. Once in a while, sure. But just from watching him play consistently, he has no confidence and would rather pass it off unless he has an open lane.
Click to expand...

I think part of that problem is that because he rarely shoots, he never gets into a rhythm. Last year for example his last 5 games before they shut him down he went for 44, 31, 17, 25, 26. He just knows that there are better shooters on the floor so he passes it to them. Granted he does occasionally overpass
 
Stevenson said:
Spot on. Would you ever see him as starter on any team with championship aspirations? No.

The only players we have that would fit on truly championship-oriented team are Dame, Ant, Shaeden, Jerami, and excuse me, Nurk (every championship team needs a hulking guy like that.)

Hart, Winslow, Drew, etc - all expendable.
Click to expand...

The truth hurts.

Dame and MAYBE Jerami are the only players who would sniff the court for a legit contender.

Ant, no.
Shaedon, (right now) hell no.
Nurk, LOL no.
 
BlazerBender said:
Whaa??? Wasnt one of the biggest gripe last year that he made the first trade a week early and should have waited?

now he is too slow joe???

this place… lol.
Click to expand...
Exactly man, and you notice it's from a lot of the same group of people. Always finding a way to complain, always finding a way to be negative 24/7.

Quite frankly is gets old quickly and the reason this place isn't as fun to browse anymore, and a lot of the reasonable posters have seemed to disappear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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