YES!! THIS IS WHAT WE WANT!!!! HE GETS IT. NOT PEOPLE THAT WANT ANOTHER ****** CENTER IN GG JACKSON
GG isn't a center, Eeyore.
YES!! THIS IS WHAT WE WANT!!!! HE GETS IT. NOT PEOPLE THAT WANT ANOTHER ****** CENTER IN GG JACKSON
I think they will have a few guys they like in that range as they are picking twice in that general area… I also don’t think it was 100% assures they would get Tatum when they moved back. 90%+ sure but dudes can change their mind quickly or pull a fast one on you.I would secure Bilal at #9, but if that's important a trade back is reasonable. I just don't think Ainge gets cute in tradeback scenarios if he likes someone. There was a 100% chance he would still get Tatum when he traded back. If there was a 95% chance he might not have done it.
I think I’d do it but I have Hawkins in similar tier to Dick, Wallace and Black. So I see it as a top 12.Only if we know one of the mostly-consensus top-11 guys is still there (most likely Wallace, Dick, and/or Black). And if we know that but are not terribly preferential of one over another then that would be a great trade.
Are you suggesting they enhance the protections on the 2024 pick so we for sure get it, and roll back the obligation to 2025, or that the obligation completely cease to exist?Thought that popped into my head… I wonder if we stay at 9 and OKC stays at 12… would you trade back to 12 to get our pick back that they own. Maybe they love Dick or maybe Hendricks is there and they love him. Might have a chance to still grab Wallace or Hawkins and then We don’t have the obligation hanging over our season.
You think GG Jackson is a center?YES!! THIS IS WHAT WE WANT!!!! HE GETS IT. NOT PEOPLE THAT WANT ANOTHER ****** CENTER IN GG JACKSON
I wouldThought that popped into my head… I wonder if we stay at 9 and OKC stays at 12… would you trade back to 12 to get our pick back that they own. Maybe they love Dick or maybe Hendricks is there and they love him. Might have a chance to still grab Wallace or Hawkins and then We don’t have the obligation hanging over our season.
You have 2 tv's? Sure would be nice to be richI will throw the TV at my other TV.
Eh, I would just take Hawkins and be happy. Then be excited to have a pick next year without having to tank.Only if we know one of the mostly-consensus top-11 guys is still there (most likely Wallace, Dick, and/or Black). And if we know that but are not terribly preferential of one over another then that would be a great trade.
So since i think we make the playoffs next year (meaning we give away our pick) you are basically asking if I would trade #9 for #12 and another first round pick (lets say #19 as I think that is about where it will be). #9 for #12 and #19. I think that is a no brainer. Easy yes for me.Thought that popped into my head… I wonder if we stay at 9 and OKC stays at 12… would you trade back to 12 to get our pick back that they own. Maybe they love Dick or maybe Hendricks is there and they love him. Might have a chance to still grab Wallace or Hawkins and then We don’t have the obligation hanging over our season.
So this is the chart I'm referencing. Not the whole season, but this is freaking crazy. God mode 50+% from above the break and a crappy 25% from the corners. It's insanity. For reference, in the NBA this season above the break was 35% and 38% from the corners. If I had to pick, I would definitely bet on the guy making the tough ones and hope he makes the easy ones than vice versa.
View: https://twitter.com/ZachMilner13/status/1623025273502584832
No obligation… it has happened before. They’d have to like someone they think won’t be there… it’s a decent jump up… we can also tell them we can manipulate the pick through tanking if they don’t want to play ball.Are you suggesting they enhance the protections on the 2024 pick so we for sure get it, and roll back the obligation to 2025, or that the obligation completely cease to exist?
I dont think you could get them to do it unless it's just rolling it back. I dont think they would fully give up control of the pick just to move up from 12 to 9. Could be wrong.
… I actually really only have one TV :’(((You have 2 tv's? Sure would be nice to be rich
IT DOESNT MATTER WHAT HE PLAYS. WE DONT WANT HIMYou think GG Jackson is a
Saying this because you watched him to end the season or this a “yada yada yada” theory?Sure, but there's nothing there that suggest he shouldnt at least be able to get to mediocre status. I think maybe we are taking a snapshot of where he was bad on D to start the season and maybe not being holistic for how his D improved throughout the season.
Just based off some articles I read about his defense.Saying this because you watched him to end the season or this a “yada yada yada” theory?
You’re a wild boi. Half the time it’s only facts accepted by you, others it’s just “that’s how I feel”.