Sexual Favors
Well-Known Member
That's why we're discussing trading 23, 35 and something else to get the #12 pick. I said Burke.
Russell Westbrook 2.0 at 23? (Zach LaVine)
- Thread starter Archie Moses
- Start date
That's why we're discussing trading 23, 35 and something else to get the #12 pick. I said Burke.
Sexual Favors
Well-Known Member
Burke will excel if he can get faster. Both in the halfcourt, and in pushing the ball. The shot clock will still read 24. He really needs to start valuing every second, otherwise, we'll be seeing Hayward running the offense again.
Sexual Favors
Well-Known Member
Lol @ Cy grasping at straws, and basing everything on the college game. Just so he can remain stubborn.
Dude has superstar potential. No one said it's a guarantee. But what he has are some incredible gifts.
Dude has superstar potential. No one said it's a guarantee. But what he has are some incredible gifts.
Coach Ellis
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't trade Burke for LaVine strait up personally. I like LaVine, but I would hate having to potentially rely on him as a starter. For all his faults, Burke has shown that he can play AND he's a gamer. He will get better. I just hope that the new coach improves the system that he's playing in AND forces him to play within that system.
He showed a huge jump from his Freshman to Sophomore seasons. I'm expecting a similar jump for him this year.
Sounds lame to me
Sexual Favors
Well-Known Member
We have Neto as well.
And even if Lavine is relied upon to play starter's minutes, it can't be worse than what we saw last year. Sure, Burke had some good games, but for the most part, Hayward was forced to run the offense, not because of Corbin, but because Burke was just too damn slow. Do you know how many shot clock violations, and low percentage late shot clock attempts we had? If Lavine has no PG skills, then a Hayward and Lavine backcourt would still be better because LaVine can actually shoot, play w/ pace, and attack the rim.
If Burke can't defend, play w/ pace, shoot, or attack the rack and draw fouls, he is wrong for our team. No matter how good of a college player he was. Undersized, underathletic, slow, and nearing 22 doesn't paint a picture of promising growth.
I thought everyone was on board with "no piece is untouchable in our quest for a star."
We don't need a superstar PG, but we do need a superstar, and at least some more positional mismatches. Lavine has that potential in spades, and can be had on the cheap. Yes, it's a gamble, but it is one i see as being well worth it.
Sexual Favors
Well-Known Member
Anyways, Trey doesn't necessarily have to be on the table. We have a lot of assets at our disposal that could potentially get us there. Boston @16 could be another option to consider, depending on how confident we felt about him being there.
Coach Ellis
Well-Known Member
A lot of it will depend on who the next coach is and what kind of system he brings. I hope that it's up-tempo, but that might not be the case. Trey could be a perfect fit if he'll speed up to the new shot clock. I have a feeling that he will.
Regardless, if they pick another point guard and/or bring over Neto. . . I want Trey Burke on the team for competition and depth purposes. Let them battle it out and the best man wins. I like Burke's spirit and I can see him developing into a team leader. I don't want to throw that away unless they have to. I've seen enough of guys who can't cut it as a #2 PG. It's killed this team for years. If they have an opportunity to pick up an upgrade, they should. . . but I think that they need to keep their team as deep as they possibly can, for as long as they possibly can.
Regardless, if they pick another point guard and/or bring over Neto. . . I want Trey Burke on the team for competition and depth purposes. Let them battle it out and the best man wins. I like Burke's spirit and I can see him developing into a team leader. I don't want to throw that away unless they have to. I've seen enough of guys who can't cut it as a #2 PG. It's killed this team for years. If they have an opportunity to pick up an upgrade, they should. . . but I think that they need to keep their team as deep as they possibly can, for as long as they possibly can.
Sexual Favors
Well-Known Member
I agree with needing depth, especially at PG, but also feel like pursuing depth before stars keeps you just good enough, and therefore out of reach of stars. We tried to suck this year and only got the #5 pick. We won't be this bad again, and therefore better get our star this draft (or believe he is already on the team), or else we will have to hit the reset button again and do it the painful way, which is stars before role players.
I don't hate Trey, but I am willing to sacrifice him if it increases our chances of getting a star.
I don't hate Trey, but I am willing to sacrifice him if it increases our chances of getting a star.
Coach Ellis
Well-Known Member
I guess I just don't see LaVine as a possible star player. He has elite athleticism, but I wouldn't take him as early as I think that he'll go and I wouldn't give up Trey to get him.
I would be willing to part with Burke if it was necessary in order to move up for an elite player, but I guess I'd just rather package some of the many draft picks that this team has stockpiled in order to do so. If they can't trade up for Jabari Parker, I want them to sit tight and draft either Vonleh or Gordon. Then they can look at trading up from #23 as far as possible and see where that leaves them.
Might be better to pick a bunch of raw draft and stash types as late 1st/2nd round picks and hope that one or two of them develop down the road.