What's new
By:

Trade Idea!

Tell Vivek that this one time Kanter hit 93 out of 100 3p shots, and tell him that he's hitting about 10% higher from 3 than Stauskas in the very first year he's been trying to hit them, and then remind him that there in Sacramento they "really like shooting"... hm... when I think about it... Trey likes shooting, too... Hm... decisions, decision...
 
The only thing here is do we think Hood will be better than Stauskus? Or would it be better to get all the shooters that we can? I think I would put Hood and Stauskus at about the same level. I still don't know how Hood fell so far.
 
I'd bet Sacramento would take that deal. I can't see them getting a better big than Kanter for Stauskas. If we felt we needed to do this I would want at least a second rounder from the Kings.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
This is an old NBA rule that probably doesn't apply now.

Would you trade Kanter for Steph Curry? The league is run by perimeter players now.

With that said kanter is a productive big guy and Nik might be Jimmer 2.0. His stats are terrible and the few times I've watched him he looks like he doesn't belong. I wouldn't write the guy off yet.
Click to expand...

You compared Kanter to Steph Curry, that's a little unfair in your example. I think the saying is supposed to mean "If you have 2 players with similar production, never go for the little guy". With what you said, someone could easily say, "well, you could trade Jeff Malone for Patrick Ewing and get better with going big."
 
I'm thinking, yes we should make that trade. We should be able to get a little more out of them too.


Gobert is our guy folks. Do you really think it's gonna be a good idea to pay a back up big a bunch of money? Is Kanter gonna be ok with a bench role?
 
Kyoto said:
You compared Kanter to Steph Curry, that's a little unfair in your example. I think the saying is supposed to mean "If you have 2 players with similar production, never go for the little guy". With what you said, someone could easily say, "well, you could trade Jeff Malone for Patrick Ewing and get better with going big."
Click to expand...

The post said NEVER trade big for small, so I used an absurd example to show the flaw in the logic of dismissing a trade simply based on we are trading a big and they are trading a small... that's all.
 
Hack said:
I'm thinking, yes we should make that trade. We should be able to get a little more out of them too.


Gobert is our guy folks. Do you really think it's gonna be a good idea to pay a back up big a bunch of money? Is Kanter gonna be ok with a bench role?
Click to expand...

That's the key part of the equation. WE can say Favors, Gobert and Kanter would be a great combo, but one has to be willing to come off the bench. Going forward, I don't think that's Rudy; he's said he wants to be a starter and he SHOULD start at the 5. Favors has shown he can be a 20/10 player (or close to it) at the PF position. Booker is developing into a decent shooter; he can be our third or fourth big. And the Jazz can draft a player like WCS or Turner to get the minutes at the 5 behind Gobert.

How is Stauskas on defense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top