The super Melo to Portland thread + The Big Blockbuster

[PtldPlatypus]

Haha! That ain't happenin, but I'd do that trade in a heartbeat!

I imagine we all would. Incredibly unrealistic, but I wanted to follow @UKRAINEFAN's blueprint as closely as possible.

 

[Scalma]

Here's the thing about Markkanen; if Olshey loved Porzingis, is there any reason he wouldn't feel the same about Markkanen? Defensively Porzingis is much better but their offensive games are pretty close. I don't think Olshey was smitten with KP because of defense...lol. I'm not saying I'm turning the corner on Markkanen, but I do kind of appreciate his potential value to a team.

 

[Minstrel]

A simple rule for evaluating your trade proposal for another team's star for fairness: Reverse it and ask yourself, assuming Portland wanted to trade Lillard, would you find the players you're sending out an acceptable/exciting return for Lillard?

If the answer is yes, you'd be pretty happy with players the caliber of (for example) Crabbe, Leonard and Harkless for Lillard then, at least as you value all the players involved, it's a relatively fair trade (others may value all the players involved very differently, though).

Remember, it's just meant to be a simple sanity check, not a sophisticated analytical tool. Obviously, different teams are in different situations and have different needs. But value still has to add up in a vacuum for the deal to be worth discussing. If it does, need and situation are good further issues to discuss.

 

[Minstrel]

Here's the thing about Markkanen; if Olshey loved Porzingis, is there any reason he wouldn't feel the same about Markkanen? Defensively Porzingis is much better but their offensive games are pretty close. I don't think Olshey was smitten with KP because of defense...lol. I'm not saying I'm turning the corner on Markkanen, but I do kind of appreciate his potential value to a team.

I mean, I'd hope defense was part of being "smitten." What makes Porzingis such an exciting young player is that he's a sweet-shooting big who doesn't compromise your defense. If all you wanted was a shooter at center, you could play Crabbe or Korver at center. Obviously, no one would do that because you'd be punting defense. Having a shooter at center who also provides rim protection is incredibly rare and valuable.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

No to Shumpert... He's garbage... I can't even play with him on 2K...

Of course he is garbage, but that's part of the price for getting rid of Leonard!

 

[Scalma]

There aren't many big men who've created waves yet in the early 2017 NBA draft discussion. Arizona's Lauri Markkanen is one of the exceptions, though his skill set doesn't reflect a traditional big man's game.

"This kid is a stud," an NBA executive told Bleacher Report. "I've watched him over seven times—his skill level and soft touch from outside are things one can't teach. Get guys to have him lower so we can steal him."


"Making shots in our league is an art," the executive said. "It's a skill no coach, you or me can teach. One hundred percent, kid is special."

------------------

That quote is a "look," away from being Neil Olshey.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

Would be more proud of you if you saved the link to the trade you assembled and posted that instead of just the link to the trade machine.

Here, I'll help you out...

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ybpapzhl

Just saying, there is zero chance of this happening. If the Cavs are engaged in a trade involving Love and George, there's no way they're willing to do it if George doesn't go to them.

I fixed it on my post. I guess I was so excited that it actually worked that i grabbed the wrong link. And, sure Cleveland would want George but i don't think Indiana is interested in Love, they would rather have picks. KP loves picks!

 

[Scalma]

I mean, I'd hope defense was part of being "smitten." What makes Porzingis such an exciting young player is that he's a sweet-shooting big who doesn't compromise your defense. If all you wanted was a shooter at center, you could play Crabbe at center. Obviously, no one would do that because you'd be punting defense. Having a shooter at center who also provides rim protection is incredibly rare and valuable.

Sure, but so is having your center shoot threes. We talk all this shit about Leonard, and rightfully so, but when he's actually playing well, it's hard not to see the value. Markkanen also does more than just spot up, so his offensive ceiling is pretty intriguing, can't lie.

 

[Minstrel]

Sure, but so is having your center shoot threes. We talk all this shit about Leonard, and rightfully so, but when he's actually playing well, it's hard not to see the value. Markkanen also does more than just spot up, so his offensive ceiling is pretty intriguing, can't lie.

Yes, but it's both together. Again, you can have your "center shoot threes" by placing Korver at center.

The magic is having your center shoot threes while not killing your defense on the other end. Even when Meyers is shooting well, there's a pretty good case to be made that he costs a lot of the offensive value he's generating on the defensive end.

I don't disagree that Markkanen is intriguing offensively and I'm not among the people who hate the idea of drafting him, but he'll need to be at least competent on defense to be worth a mid-first round pick or higher, IMO.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

A simple rule for evaluating your trade proposal for another team's star for fairness: Reverse it and ask yourself, assuming Portland wanted to trade Lillard, would you find the players you're sending out an acceptable/exciting return for Lillard?

If the answer is yes, you'd be pretty happy with players the caliber of (for example) Crabbe, Leonard and Harkless for Lillard then, at least as you value all the players involved, it's a relatively fair trade (others may value all the players involved very differently, though).

Remember, it's just meant to be a simple sanity check, not a sophisticated analytical tool. Obviously, different teams are in different situations and have different needs. But value still has to add up in a vacuum for the deal to be worth discussing. If it does, need and situation are good further issues to discuss.

I think I propose trades with both teams in mind. I'm sure you know that Lillard, who has four years left and loves Portland is not comparable to George who has two and doesn't love Indiana. Sometime we get so down on our own players and their contracts that we don't see the possibilities. OK, now I see you are maybe comparing Lillard to Love. Lillard, two years younger, one more year on contract, PER 3 points higher, shines in the playoffs while Love doesn't.

 

[Minstrel]

I think I propose trades with both teams in mind. I'm sure you know that Lillard, who has four years left and loves Portland is not comparable to George who has two and doesn't love Indiana. Sometime we get so down on our own players and their contracts that we don't see the possibilities. OK, now I see you are maybe comparing Lillard to Love. Lillard, two years younger, one more year on contract, PER 3 points higher, shines in the playoffs while Love doesn't.

We'll always find reasons why our star is worth a lot and their star is worth all the roster garbage we either don't want or don't really care about losing. If you spoke to a fan of another team, they'd have similar reasons why Lillard isn't worth as much as their star. That's why I actually wouldn't get too caught in the weeds of exactly how good one star is compared to another when applying a basic sanity check.

If it passes that basic check, yes, all the little details matter.

 

[dviss1]

Of course he is garbage, but that's part of the price for getting rid of Leonard!

Haha! He is better than Butters! LOL!

 

[Scalma]

Yes, but it's both together. Again, you can have your "center shoot threes" by placing Korver at center.

The magic is having your center shoot threes while not killing your defense on the other end. Even when Meyers is shooting well, there's a pretty good case to be made that he costs a lot of the offensive value he's generating on the defensive end.

I don't disagree that Markkanen is intriguing offensively and I'm not among the people who hate the idea of drafting him, but he'll need to be at least competent on defense to be worth a mid-first round pick or higher, IMO.

I guess the question is whether or not Markkanens shortcomings defensively/rebounding wise are fixable. I'm coming around on the idea that they are. I think he's a fairly smart player that just needs to get stronger. I don't think he'll ever be a true rim protector or some great rebounder, but I like his potential as a one on one defender. I also think he shows enough agility to handle switches on the perimeter. I think he profiles well next to Nurkic.

 

[Minstrel]

I guess the question is whether or not Markkanens shortcomings defensively/rebounding wise are fixable. I'm coming around on the idea that they are. I think he's a fairly smart player that just needs to get stronger. I don't think he'll ever be a true rim protector or some great rebounder, but I like his potential as a one on one defender. I also think he shows enough agility to handle switches on the perimeter. I think he profiles well next to Nurkic.

I wouldn't mind Markkanen at 15. I don't think he's awful defensively and with even a little improvement, he could at least hold his own sufficiently not to be constantly targeted in pick-and-rolls. As you said, he has the agility for it. Leonard does, too, so you just have to hope that Markkanen will process the flow of the game faster than Leonard which (IMO) has been the fatal flaw for Leonard. I completely agree that he fits really well next to Nurkic.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

We'll always find reasons why our star is worth a lot and their star is worth all the roster garbage we either don't want or don't really care about losing. If you spoke to a fan of another team, they'd have similar reasons why Lillard isn't worth as much as their star. That's why I actually wouldn't get too caught in the weeds of exactly how good one star is compared to another when applying a basic sanity check.

If it passes that basic check, yes, all the little details matter.

I'm having trouble applying your rule for basic sanity check because I don't consider Love a star. I consider him a really good rotation player. And i don't know who to use on Portland to try your rule with. We have two stars and one really young guy who seems to have a lot of potential. We don't have any really good rotation players. So I added two fairly good rotation players together. I think Cleveland's problem is not star power but depth. So, when I apply your rule, I still think this trade is doable. Now, what are your ideas for some good trades? And I promise not to suggest you apply a basic sanity check to your ideas.

 

[Minstrel]

I'm having trouble applying your rule for basic sanity check because I don't consider Love a star.

We'll have to agree to disagree then. I think his performance in Minnesota clearly illustrated that he's a star talent--his production has been curtailed by the "there's only one ball" issue that actually matters when you play with other ball-dominant stars like James and irving.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I wouldn't mind Markkanen at 15. I don't think he's awful defensively and with even a little improvement, he could at least hold his own sufficiently not to be constantly targeted in pick-and-rolls. As you said, he has the agility for it. Leonard does, too, so you just have to hope that Markkanen will process the flow of the game faster than Leonard which (IMO) has been the fatal flaw for Leonard. I completely agree that he fits really well next to Nurkic.

Unfortunately he will be long gone by 15. But not only would he fit well next to Nurk, but would allow us to have a SF on the floor who is not a good 3pt shooter. (i.e Harkless, Aminu or ET) Of course Terry would actually have to stop encouraging those 3 to shoot from out there.

 

[Scalma]

Unfortunately he will be long gone by 15. But not only would he fit well next to Nurk, but would allow us to have a SF on the floor who is not a good 3pt shooter. (i.e Harkless, Aminu or ET) Of course Terry would actually have to stop encouraging those 3 to shoot from out there.

Yeah, i think Markkanen will go somewhere in the top 8, but would it really shock anyone if Olshey traded up for him? I'd almost laugh at the predictability of that move.

Would you give 15 and 20 for him? I personally wouldn't, but I also wouldn't be mad if Olshey did.

 

[Minstrel]

Unfortunately he will be long gone by 15. But not only would he fit well next to Nurk, but would allow us to have a SF on the floor who is not a good 3pt shooter. (i.e Harkless, Aminu or ET) Of course Terry would actually have to stop encouraging those 3 to shoot from out there.

I'd actually hope Harkless continues to work on his three-point shot this off-season. Having four guys who can shoot threes and Nurkic inside would be a load for any defense to deal with. You're right, though, that with Markkanen, the small forward not being a shooter wouldn't be a disaster.

 

[dviss1]

I fixed it on my post. I guess I was so excited that it actually worked that i grabbed the wrong link. And, sure Cleveland would want George but i don't think Indiana is interested in Love, they would rather have picks. KP loves picks!

What picks do you have going to IND in your scenario? All of them? I'm thinking they might want Hark...

 

[dviss1]

I'm having trouble applying your rule for basic sanity check because I don't consider Love a star. I consider him a really good rotation player. And i don't know who to use on Portland to try your rule with. We have two stars and one really young guy who seems to have a lot of potential. We don't have any really good rotation players. So I added two fairly good rotation players together. I think Cleveland's problem is not star power but depth. So, when I apply your rule, I still think this trade is doable. Now, what are your ideas for some good trades? And I promise not to suggest you apply a basic sanity check to your ideas.

I think I'll take Bron's opinion over yours. He literally made them trade for Kevin Love. Bron, Kyrie, and Love have always been known as their "big 3".

 

[Schilly]

When evaluating potential trades something I try to factor is how the incoming player fits the coach and system. The reason the Spurs have maintained success is they repeatedly get players that work with the system Popovic has in place. As an analogy if you have and Indy car driver you get him and Indy car and have him race Indy races, you don't get him a Rally car and send him to Pikes Peak.

So a big part of the equation is how will Stotts utilize a player... Don't like Stotts, too bad, he's the coach and there's no indication that will change anytime soon. Olshey would not being doing his job if he gave the coach the wrong tools.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

When evaluating potential trades something I try to factor is how the incoming player fits the coach and system. The reason the Spurs have maintained success is they repeatedly get players that work with the system Popovic has in place. As an analogy if you have and Indy car driver you get him and Indy car and have him race Indy races, you don't get him a Rally car and send him to Pikes Peak.

So a big part of the equation is how will Stotts utilize a player... Don't like Stotts, too bad, he's the coach and there's no indication that will change anytime soon. Olshey would not being doing his job if he gave the coach the wrong tools.

Which is why I don't think a three-team deal in which Love comes to Portland and some other player Lebron wants (George or 'Melo) goes to Cleveland is out of the realm of possibility.

 

[BonesJones]

Let's forget about Anthony and go for Kevin Love instead. Cleveland thinks Love and Shumpert cost them the playoffs (I actually think if they had a decent backup PG they could have made a series out of it, but anyway). Crabbe, Harkless and Leonard for Love and Shumpert. They don't really have a SG who can shoot threes and play defense. Let's suppose they get a new GM who thinks Crabbe can do that. Jefferson is ready to retire; they need a backup SF like Harkless, who could also play more when James is PF. They figure James could not only make Harkless better with his passing but also could light a fire under his ass. Leonard they just have to take and hope he does something for them. If they want we throw in Napier. If they think they need to get tougher, we trade them Davis for Frye (I noticed Frye didn't play in six of the playoff games). Now we make this a three-way (aren't you proud of me Bones-Jones?). We send Vonleh and as many first round draft picks from this year and future years as it takes to get Paul George. We get Indiana's 2nd rounder back and hope to find a backup PF.
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=y7gwqytg

No, because the salaries don't match and the trade machine doesn't know that incoming and outgoing salaries have to be within $5M.

Its also not a really 3-team trade, its just two different deals lumped together that wouldn't work under the cap.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

No, because the salaries don't match and the trade machine doesn't know that incoming and outgoing salaries have to be within $5M.

Its also not a really 3-team trade, its just two different deals lumped together that wouldn't work under the cap.

If the salaries involved are over $20M, the 125% rule supersedes the $5M rule.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I think I'll take Bron's opinion over yours. He literally made them trade for Kevin Love. Bron, Kyrie, and Love have always been known as their "big 3".

Yeah I think it works for the CAVs. I think Lebron likes the fact that Love can spread the floor and rebound and pass. LBJ needs room to attack the rim and having two post players down low (and the 2 players guarding them) makes it a bit congested. Against the Warriors he strolled down the lane with little resistance.

 

[dviss1]

No, because the salaries don't match and the trade machine doesn't know that incoming and outgoing salaries have to be within $5M.

Its also not a really 3-team trade, its just two different deals lumped together that wouldn't work under the cap.

Says the guy who consistently makes 4-7 team blockbuster trade scenarios?

 

[BonesJones]

Says the guy who consistently makes 4-7 team blockbuster trade scenarios?

Lol. Thing is, they're made for fun and all make sense and work with the cap but people don't look past the 3-4 team part.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

I think I'll take Bron's opinion over yours. He literally made them trade for Kevin Love. Bron, Kyrie, and Love have always been known as their "big 3".

LeBron is a guy who has been known to change his opinion.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

What picks do you have going to IND in your scenario? All of them? I'm thinking they might want Hark...

I'm sure they'd like Harkless, but I am sending him to Cleveland. I need Love coming in to hopefully make sure PG will stay. If I know Love is coming, I am willing to give more to Indiana, but of course not any more than it would take.