Time to trade CJ

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
beast crnjo said:
I think we just need to dump cj for his salary alone. He's become a no defense lamarcus Aldridge.
Click to expand...

I said the same here.

jlprk said:
We wouldn't have to choose among these 3 players if Olshey would give away McCollum, as he should. Then, they would get playing time. You wouldn't even notice McCollum's absence. The team would be fun to watch again, with a decentralized offense.
Click to expand...
 
Natebishop3 said:
Not just GTJ but Simons and Elleby. We have people that can fill in and do a better job on defense. We should try to cash in CJ for a small forward.
Click to expand...

I think Simons would have to improve like crazy for Neil to consider trading CJ. Assuming Simons continues to develop but is still raw, what I can see happening is Trent getting the extension probably worth around $18m. And we will probably see a trio of Lillard 35/ McCollum 35/Trent 26 at the guard position. And with this being my lowest expectation, I would be happy with this.

And a SF I see as a perfect fit here is Otto Porter Jr. If the Bulls continue to tank, they will probably waive him. I think we still have the bi-annual exception—we would probably be in the lead money wise, and he would have a shot to compete. With Otto, we would have a Covington 30/Porter 30/Hood 24 at the forward spots with Nurk 27/Kanter 21.

If the Bulls end up waiving Porter and he signed with us, that would already greatly improve the roster without even having to trade CJ. I don’t see us getting a George/Kawhi/KD/Tatum/Brown kind of wing in a CJ deal and anything outside of them and probably one of the dominant bigs like KAT/Embiid would not be worth it to me.

If CJ keeps pushing toward a 5-6ppg career average and Trent keeps working on his handle and playmaking, I don’t think we will ever need to consider trading CJ barring a disgruntled star or something along those lines.
 
pougie said:
I think Simons would have to improve like crazy for Neil to consider trading CJ. Assuming Simons continues to develop but is still raw, what I can see happening is Trent getting the extension probably worth around $18m. And we will probably see a trio of Lillard 35/ McCollum 35/Trent 26 at the guard position. And with this being my lowest expectation, I would be happy with this.

And a SF I see as a perfect fit here is Otto Porter Jr. If the Bulls continue to tank, they will probably waive him. I think we still have the bi-annual exception—we would probably be in the lead money wise, and he would have a shot to compete. With Otto, we would have a Covington 30/Porter 30/Hood 24 at the forward spots with Nurk 27/Kanter 21.

If the Bulls end up waiving Porter and he signed with us, that would already greatly improve the roster without even having to trade CJ. I don’t see us getting a George/Kawhi/KD/Tatum/Brown kind of wing in a CJ deal and anything outside of them and probably one of the dominant bigs like KAT/Embiid would not be worth it to me.

If CJ keeps pushing toward a 5-6ppg career average and Trent keeps working on his handle and playmaking, I don’t think we will ever need to consider trading CJ barring a disgruntled star or something along those lines.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that we would pay Gary 18 million per year and keep CJ? If you are, just next year... and Dame's raises keep getting bigger, next year we will be spending 92 million on three guards. That's insane. We won't be able to stay afloat. Why would we even need the redundance of CJ? What we would need is a capable PG to backup Dame and that's it. Although we could get something really good for CJ... not an all nba player but something really really good. Hopefully that good player would come from a team with cap space and that good player would make far less than CJ. That would give us flexibility. Any way you want to slice it CJ and Dame are no good together. They both suck on D. On offense they step all over each other. So I know Neil won't but he could do so much better.

Also Porter is getting more than the fucking BAE ($3M) but honestly none of that really matters because the guys you have listed before Porter cost more than 133 million but that's without Kanter who you don't provide means to sign. That's also with you neglecting the fact that Jones can opt in but I guess if he does we can let Hoodie go. If we kept both we'd be at 143M without a backup C. We'd also be letting Zach walk... and then there is the pesky fact that we have another 6M committed to Nas, Elleby and deadcap... and then at least one more roster spot to fill that's another million. So that's 140M if Hoodie or DJJ walks. Still no backup C. So luxury tax and no back up big, in fact no one on the roster over 6'7" besides Nurk. I don't think the plan works.
 
Trent JR is much better for Dame than CJ. CJ contract will be massive once it expires he be free agent anyway. It be smart move to trade him
 
blazerkor said:
Are you saying that we would pay Gary 18 million per year and keep CJ? If you are, just next year... and Dame's raises keep getting bigger, next year we will be spending 92 million on three guards. That's insane. We won't be able to stay afloat. Why would we even need the redundance of CJ? What we would need is a capable PG to backup Dame and that's it. Although we could get something really good for CJ... not an all nba player but something really really good. Hopefully that good player would come from a team with cap space and that good player would make far less than CJ. That would give us flexibility. Any way you want to slice it CJ and Dame are no good together. They both suck on D. On offense they step all over each other. So I know Neil won't but he could do so much better.

Also Porter is getting more than the fucking BAE ($3M) but honestly none of that really matters because the guys you have listed before Porter cost more than 133 million but that's without Kanter who you don't provide means to sign. That's also with you neglecting the fact that Jones can opt in but I guess if he does we can let Hoodie go. If we kept both we'd be at 143M without a backup C. We'd also be letting Zach walk... and then there is the pesky fact that we have another 6M committed to Nas, Elleby and deadcap... and then at least one more roster spot to fill that's another million. So that's 140M if Hoodie or DJJ walks. Still no backup C. So luxury tax and no back up big, in fact no one on the roster over 6'7" besides Nurk. I don't think the plan works.
Click to expand...
Uh, if Porter gets bought out he'll sign for the league minimum.
 
BonesJones said:
Uh, if Porter gets bought out he'll sign for the league minimum.
Click to expand...
I don't see it. He still shoots 40% from three and when you look at his per36 numbers he's definitely not a vet min guy. I realize his injury issues make him a huge liability but I think he'll get better than the BAE.
 
CJ has been much better (offensively) this year from an efficiency and passing standpoint, but I think the point made by others above still holds. His contract is an anchor in an undersized backcourt. Trent (while having lapses) is much better defensively and Elleby, for all his lost/dear-in-the-headlights moments, showed that he better defensively even if it was a glimpse.

Last night's team effort and scrappiness was a welcome reprieve from the stale, no-effort on defense sequals we have seen far too often this year.
 
A good trading partner could be Philly. They need CJ and if we add Collins and Simons plus a #1 - is this enough to nab Ben Simmons and Tyrese Maxey?
 
Natebishop3 said:
This is probably a pipe dream, but Siakam isn't performing that well this year.

View attachment 36655
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think Toronto would rather stick with Siakam. Getting McCollum means going with a tiny backcourt in VanVleet and McCollum if they cut bait with Lowry after this season. For the same reasons it's non-ideal for Portland, it would be non-ideal for them.
 
Minstrel said:
Yeah, I think Toronto would rather stick with Siakam. Getting McCollum means going with a tiny backcourt in VanVleet and McCollum if they cut bait with Lowry after this season. For the same reasons it's non-ideal for Portland, it would be non-ideal for them.
Click to expand...

I said it was probably a pipe dream! Gosh Minstrel!
 
Minstrel said:
Yeah, I think Toronto would rather stick with Siakam. Getting McCollum means going with a tiny backcourt in VanVleet and McCollum if they cut bait with Lowry after this season. For the same reasons it's non-ideal for Portland, it would be non-ideal for them.
Click to expand...

Down the stretch of their finals run they had a smaller backcourt than Dame and CJ. Green's minutes diminished while Van Vleet
and Lowry increased. (3rd and 4th on the teams in terms of minutes) Of course, they had Kawhi and Siakam on the floor as well, but that does not change the fact that their super small backcourt was not an issue.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Down the stretch of their finals run they had a smaller backcourt than Dame and CJ. Green's minutes diminished while Van Vleet
and Lowry increased. (3rd and 4th on the teams in terms of minutes) Of course, they had Kawhi and Siakam on the floor as well, but that does not change the fact that their super small backcourt was not an issue.
Click to expand...

Lowry is unusual, in that he plays bigger than his size, because he's very strong for a 6'0'' player (in addition to being a very good defensive player). That's why I said if Toronto cuts bait on Lowry.

Neither VanVleet nor McCollum are unusual in that regard, though VanVleet is at least a pretty good defender.
 
4xvbqy.jpg
 
This team is an elite wing away from contending. DJJ is not that dude. If we could trade CJ for a small forward, we could win the whole fuckin thing.
 
I fucking hate how everytime the team plays well without C.J.... or when Gary Trent Jr. plays well... It becomes "We're better without C.J."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top