Rodney Hood named Rookie of the Month

[stitches]

Point taken. My proposal is excessive. What I meant is all those assets are in play for me, not that you use all of them.

Lavine is a brainless player, possible recipient of the "Dion Waiters" award in the future. He's one of the worst rookies of all time according to numerous advanced stats(like actually worst, not Dante-level frustrating with his passivity, but when you actually look deeper you see he's helping you win). Horrendous defender, brainless scorer in offense.

 

[Sexual Favors]

^ the thing that I think a lot of you don't realize is advanced stats are relatively new, and players are coming to the league less prepared than ever before with the one-and done culture and stigma for players who stay longer. Judging talented, yet inexperienced players, off of advanced stats solely is naive. For young players who are uber talented, have nba gifts, but are very inexperienced, you have to account for growth.

We have one of the best coaching staffs for developing players. We can take the risk on these hyper talented/inexperienced players. If Lavine was dumb with no desire, that would be another thing entirely. By all accounts, he stays in the gym and wants to be great. Flip Saunders is not the coach for him.

 

[stitches]

I am not judging him based on advanced stat. I judge him based on what I see, the advanced stats just confirm what I see.

 

[MTS]

Actually, even though a lot of advanced stats such as PER favor volume and ignore defense, Rodney Hood still ranks higher than Zach Lavine.

I think Hood will end up being the better player by a significant margin.

 

[Sexual Favors]

I want Hood too. My offer is Trey, and picks.

 

[Bodhi]

So you are an ardent Kanter defender and a Zach Lavine advocate? Noted.

 

[framer]

^ the thing that I think a lot of you don't realize is advanced stats are relatively new, and players are coming to the league less prepared than ever before with the one-and done culture and stigma for players who stay longer. Judging talented, yet inexperienced players, off of advanced stats solely is naive. For young players who are uber talented, have nba gifts, but are very inexperienced, you have to account for growth.

We have one of the best coaching staffs for developing players. We can take the risk on these hyper talented/inexperienced players. If Lavine was dumb with no desire, that would be another thing entirely. By all accounts, he stays in the gym and wants to be great. Flip Saunders is not the coach for him.

Bringing Flip Saunders into the conversation is actually a pretty strong card in defense of Lavine. It's hard to tell if some of the stupidity could be coached out when it is likely being coached IN. Good job. . .

 

[Siro]

Point taken. My proposal is excessive. What I meant is all those assets are in play for me, not that you use all of them.

I salivate over a ten man rotation like this:

PG
Exum, Lavine, Neto

SG
Burks, Hood, Lavine

SF
Hayward, Hood, Burks

PF
Favors, Booker, Hayward

C

Gobert, Tomic, Favors

With players like Cotton, Johnson, Ingles, and Millsap to fill in when needed.

Is your proposal excessive? You're giving them garbage. Now I don't personally like Lavine, but if you do, then you're trading him for our garbage + a nice pick.

 

[Sexual Favors]

Is your proposal excessive? You're giving them garbage. Now I don't personally like Lavine, but if you do, then you're trading him for our garbage + a nice pick.

How is a lottery pick, another future first rounder, and the choice of the PG they initially drafted, or a euro stash, garbage?


That deal would be garvage if Lavine was proven, but he's not yet. We still have to develop him to play winning basketball.

 

[Siro]

How is a lottery pick, another future first rounder, and the choice of the PG they initially drafted, or a euro stash, garbage?


That deal would be garvage if Lavine was proven, but he's not yet. We still have to develop him to play winning basketball.

Not an honest answer. I didn't included the lottery pick in the "garbage", so that's taken care of. OKC's first isn't that appealing given that we may never even get it. Best case, it's a late teen pick. So whatever. And they never picked Trey. Is this a joke? They picked him because we asked them to pick him for the trade. He currently has no value as he's a **** player.

So ya. Garbage.

 

[stitches]

Not an honest answer. I didn't included the lottery pick in the "garbage", so that's taken care of. OKC's first isn't that appealing given that we may never even get it. Best case, it's a late teen pick. So whatever. And they never picked Trey. Is this a joke? They picked him because we asked them to pick him for the trade. He currently has no value as he's a **** player.

So ya. Garbage.

That's not exactly true. Trey has been pretty bad but I think he has some marginal value because he's on a rookie contract and has room to improve and has shown that in limited role he can be a useful piece off the bench. The problem right now with him and the Jazz is that his role is not limited and we expect him to create offense and finish our offense when we have nobody else on the floor to do that. I'd say he's worth at least a second round pick right now. Also Pleiss has value too. OKC were about to get him over to be their back up last year, he will too be on a team-friendly contract whenever he comes over. I'd say he's worth a at least a second round pick, too.

 

[Siro]

That's not exactly true. Trey has been pretty bad but I think he has some marginal value because he's on a rookie contract and has room to improve and has shown that in limited role he can be a useful piece off the bench. The problem right now with him and the Jazz is that his role is not limited and we expect him to create offense and finish our offense when we have nobody else on the floor to do that. I'd say he's worth at least a second round pick right now. Also Pleiss has value too. OKC were about to get him over to be their back up last year, he will too be on a team-friendly contract whenever he comes over. I'd say he's worth a at least a second round pick, too.

Okay, so he has a second round pick value. The question was whether you think Lavine is among the best rookies in this draft (second to Wiggins!). Burks is a good player. But if someone suggested we trade Burks for Curry, then he'd be suggesting we trade Curry for garbage, relatively speaking. To call Lavine a proven top 3 pick, then suggest that trading him for a 12th + 20th + second round pick to be "excessive" is nonsense. That's all I'm saying. If he's that good, then that trade would be a steal for us.