What's new
By:

Who Would You Rather Have: Herro or Holiday?

Assuming price is relatively equal, who would you rather have?

  • Herro

  • Holiday

Results are only viewable after voting.
Handlogten's Heros said:
DA is always looking and trying… way different from the previous regime that liked to wait to see if the phone would ring. I have no doubt we’ve been in all these convos.
Click to expand...
I don’t doubt that either, I just wonder how motivated we are and if we’re particular comfortable at this moment. When we become more motivated on specifics, or when we feel the dust has settled on being able to see where we’re currently at, I believe a couple things can stand in the way there. One is a move like the Collins deal. The other is that I feel like we’ve done a bit of a disservice to run with three first rounders, rather than looking at any kind of consolidation. We’ve rendered those picks less valuable to us by having so many, with little developmental time, to the point that the likelihood of someone being a throw-away player increases. There’s a disconnect on the valuation of first round picks (league wide) over time, where the value is highest about a year out from the draft, but how often have we seen a first round guy get jettisoned after a year or two without anyone really caring?
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I had hope but I have main character syndrome and project it onto the Jazz. I think the package I outlined was close to what they got. Not convinced Williams will be a huge asset unless he can play 20-25 games with solid health. If he does they could flip him for a pick. Brogdon is maybe worth some seconds. Portland did pretty well but the picks are so far out.
Click to expand...
Yeah, went back to see that trade proposal. Problably ain't that far off, cause this 24 pick ain't really valuable (considered a weaker draft and Warriors might be middle of the pack anyway) and Celtics have a much better chance at being decent in 2029 than the Bucks, but that Lakers pick is kinda of a catch as the protection is becoming a second (high upside, really low floor) and the players there don't really have value (maybe they could try keep developing Fontecchio, Ingles first year wasn't exciting, not that Simone is equal as a player, just thinking of when they got to the NBA), THJr and THT could be used to take in bad salary, but neither has real value rn. And even still I'm not sure i'd rather offer a Wolves 27 in a deal than a Jazz 29, especially in a trade we'd do just to raise the floor of our team, not to take us to the next level.

And i don't think it is that bad for the Blazers that a lot of them picks are further down the line. Sure they have their job to do instead of just waiting for those picks (that who knows how good they'll come out to be), but they'll have time to do something with their picks they actually own (unlike the Rockets for example, one could say the Nets too if they were rebuilding, tho they may at least make the play in) while getting also good young talent and tradeable deals in return to get them back on track, and when nearing contention again, still possessing a good number of valuable picks/assets for trades to take the next step.
 
infection said:
I don’t doubt that either, I just wonder how motivated we are and if we’re particular comfortable at this moment. When we become more motivated on specifics, or when we feel the dust has settled on being able to see where we’re currently at, I believe a couple things can stand in the way there. One is a move like the Collins deal. The other is that I feel like we’ve done a bit of a disservice to run with three first rounders, rather than looking at any kind of consolidation. We’ve rendered those picks less valuable to us by having so many, with little developmental time, to the point that the likelihood of someone being a throw-away player increases. There’s a disconnect on the valuation of first round picks (league wide) over time, where the value is highest about a year out from the draft, but how often have we seen a first round guy get jettisoned after a year or two without anyone really caring?
Click to expand...
Yeah we kinda all over the place and have a bit too much random stuff on the roster right now. That’s part of the reason I like the Jrue trade… really would have simplified things a bit in addition to making is really good. The value hunting is good but at some point you have to fit the parts a bit better than I think we have.

Still excited to see what happens.
 
We dodged a bullet, looking at what was given up. We would have had to gut our assets. Whew!

You are all welcome!
 
LogGrad98 said:
We dodged a bullet, looking at what was given up. We would have had to gut our assets. Whew!

You are all welcome!
Click to expand...
Maybe but it wouldn’t have equated to gutting our assets. We are net +6 with first round picks the next 6 years and have 5 dudes on rookie contracts with trade value. It was gonna be pricey but the fit on and off court was basically perfect… contract was a big issue but oh well.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Maybe but it wouldn’t have equated to gutting our assets. We are net +6 with first round picks the next 6 years and have 5 dudes on rookie contracts with trade value. It was gonna be pricey but the fit on and off court was basically perfect… contract was a big issue but oh well.
Click to expand...
And thats without mentioning swaps
 
LogGrad98 said:
We dodged a bullet, looking at what was given up. We would have had to gut our assets. Whew!

You are all welcome!
Click to expand...
Yes, Boston paid a high price, but as HH has said here, “when you are shopping for a beach house you don't bring an apartment budget.” For me this was about an opportunity to get where we should be defensively if we want to be a contender. It’s so damn hard to find two-way players like Jrue. And with him we would've also solved the playmaking issue we’re having. Would’ve been a perfect fit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top