What's new
By:

Who could we trade for?

I am amazed at the number of proposed PG trades with Dante still on our books. If you are getting Lawson, Lin, Rondo, Shroeder(only Lin being a short term solution) etc. what are you going to do with Exum? Did we give up on him already?

In a weird way Dante is in the best scenario possible for his development. Starting off on the bench, while developing his body and skills, being behind a bad PG, allowing him to have his sight at the starting spot if not by the end of this season, then by some time next season...
 
Vermin said:
Sit back and let this play out. Jesus. Who besides the delusional thought we would be better than this considering the ridiculous schedule we have had. There are only two players I really think should be moved and they are kanter and trey.

I'm also not willing to give up a 1st for anything other than a potential star. I'm liking how this draft class is coming together. If we could land another top7 pick their are some intriguing players there. Mix him in with our young vets i think we start sniffing the playoffs next year and are in a better position to swing for the fences for a star player if needed.
Click to expand...

Agreed with this. Trey and Kanter are the only ones I'd move. Favors has shown glimpses of offensive potential this year. Burks seems like he's still trying to get his head around this offense. Gobert also has potential.


Let's take this year and see how these guys panned out first before doing anything on a whim. Been saying this, but we should really give the Gobert/Favors lineup more time as well to see if they fit. Favors has been hitting shots this year.
 
stitches said:
I am amazed at the number of proposed PG trades with Dante still on our books. If you are getting Lawson, Lin, Rondo, Shroeder(only Lin being a short term solution) etc. what are you going to do with Exum? Did we give up on him already?

In a weird way Dante is in the best scenario possible for his development. Starting off on the bench, while developing his body and skills, being behind a bad PG, allowing him to have his sight at the starting spot if not by the end of this season, then by some time next season...
Click to expand...

It looks like some think Exum can be an SG because "positions don't mean much anymore, and any position can create offense". O.o
 
Kanter & Burke for Faried is one that I'm liking the most so far from this thread.


Faried is on the out in Denver, their FO is dysfunctional, their GM is a rookie. If they don't make the playoffs this year we should take Faried off their hands.
 
stitches said:
I am amazed at the number of proposed PG trades with Dante still on our books. If you are getting Lawson, Lin, Rondo, Shroeder(only Lin being a short term solution) etc. what are you going to do with Exum? Did we give up on him already?

In a weird way Dante is in the best scenario possible for his development. Starting off on the bench, while developing his body and skills, being behind a bad PG, allowing him to have his sight at the starting spot if not by the end of this season, then by some time next season...
Click to expand...

You watched Phoenix lately? They play 2 PG's, it can be done. Dante doesn't have a monopoly on the position.
 
There are twice as many quality PG's as there are quality SG's. It's going to be easier to pair Dante with a PG in the future than a SG.
 
Cy said:
You watched Phoenix lately? They play 2 PG's, it can be done. Dante doesn't have a monopoly on the position.
Click to expand...

Sure it can be done. We can even put 3 PGs in... The question is what's the ceiling on that type of system. Teams have had trouble winning championships with one elite PG as part of the system in the last 25 years. I doubt it will be any better with 2. Imagine you get 2 PGs at max salary(or close to max) and Gordon Hayward at max. Will a team structured like that have any chance at a championship? I doubt it...

The Suns are currently fooling themselves. Dragic is up for a contract next year. What happens when he wants a Max? Can they even pay him? They probably can, but they will have to empty the bank. Will Bledsoe-Dragic-Morris-Morris-Plumlee/Len win anything? I honestly don't ever see them moving past round 1 of the playoffs with that type of system relying on 2 PGs to be their best 2 players...
 
It's apparent to me from last night's game that we need a "Star" or two at least in a team to win. Everytime we made a run at the Clippers, either Chris Paul or Blake came back the other way with an easy basket. Also we were only able to make that run because Hayward was scoring 20 pts in a quarter - he can't do that by himself all game, every game. Sure you can try to build a team ala Pistons 2004 but that's proven to be an anomaly now.


It's a cliche, but we really need to reach for the "Star".
 
stitches said:
Sure it can be done. We can even put 3 PGs in... The question is what's the ceiling on that type of system. Teams have had trouble winning championships with one elite PG as part of the system in the last 25 years. I doubt it will be any better with 2. Imagine you get 2 PGs at max salary(or close to max) and Gordon Hayward at max. Will a team structured like that have any chance at a championship? I doubt it...

The Suns are currently fooling themselves. Dragic is up for a contract next year. What happens when he wants a Max? Can they even pay him? They probably can, but they will have to empty the bank. Will Bledsoe-Dragic-Morris-Morris-Plumlee/Len win anything? I honestly don't ever see them moving past round 1 of the playoffs with that type of system relying on 2 PGs to be their best 2 players...
Click to expand...

You are dumb. Good players win games, not positons. Get the best players, figure it out later. Having a 6'6 guy who can play PG gives you a ton of flexibility. It would be beyond ****ing retarded to ignore that flexibility and focus solely on SG's. Don't be dumb.
 
ONE LOVE said:
It's apparent to me from last night's game that we need a "Star" or two at least in a team to win. Everytime we made a run at the Clippers, either Chris Paul or Blake came back the other way with an easy basket. Also we were only able to make that run because Hayward was scoring 20 pts in a quarter - he can't do that by himself all game, every game. Sure you can try to build a team ala Pistons 2004 but that's proven to be an anomaly now.


It's a cliche, but we really need to reach for the "Star".
Click to expand...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRyfgKGQSBk
 
Cy said:
You are dumb. Good players win games, not positons. Get the best players, figure it out later. Having a 6'6 guy who can play PG gives you a ton of flexibility. It would be beyond ****ing retarded to ignore that flexibility and focus solely on SG's. Don't be dumb.
Click to expand...

Yes, because anything I said is ignoring the flexibility that a 6'6'' with PG skills gives. smh

Also, stop moving the goalposts. This is a completely different argument than "we can play 2 PGs" argument. So when you gave me the Phoenix argument, you weren't actually meaning to say we can play like them. In which case you pointing to that example is completely meaningless.
 
stitches said:
Yes, because anything I said is ignoring the flexibility that a 6'6'' with PG skills gives. smh

Also, stop moving the goalposts. This is a completely different argument than "we can play 2 PGs" argument. So when you gave me the Phoenix argument, you weren't actually meaning to say we can play like them. In which case you pointing to that example is completely meaningless.
Click to expand...

What?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top