The level of stupidity here. :lol
Printable View
The level of stupidity here. :lol
I'm not saying dump him for nothing. Some are ok with that but I would prefer to get a player. That's why my deal was for Bradley
What argument?Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
Everybody knows that Manu has been the de facto PG of the bench for the past decade and he has done a pretty damn well job at it, and considering that when/if everybody is healthy, Anderson and Gay will do a lot of ball handling off the bench too, there really isn't much of a need for yet another ball-handler on that squad, tbh.Quote:
Mills is a PG/SG hybrid. Forbes is already shooting better than Mills from 3, Manu is there and even Danny in a bad year has a 3PT% that is close to Mills IIRC
There is really no one close on the roster at PG that can run offense like TP can or even get into the paint like he does even if his overall impact is marginal
It makes a lot more sense to have Mills alongside Manu, Anderson, Gay and Gasol/Aldridge (the suppossed bench unit with everybody healthy) than having Parker in there, tbh.
I really like this trade actually. If Bradley is not hitting his shots at least we can use his defense (contrary to 50Mills).Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
An upgrade at pg is our number 1 need imo, anyone but Aldridge and kawhi for kemba
Detroit.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
Spurs quickly shooting down KL trade calls -
http://nba.nbcsports.com/2018/01/29/...d-trade-calls/
I wouldn’t oppose trading Danny for Bradley in some type of structured deal; him, Murray, and kawhi would be sick on the perimeter.
The argument that what TP does well is replaceable based on current personnel as much as that stands for Mills.Quote:
Originally Posted by DAF86
- Mills makes no sense for Pistons. If they plan is to get out of paying Bradley, then why would they pay Mills, when they already have two expensive PG's? He wouldn't even solve their need for a creator.
- Bradley makes no sense for Spurs, either. Green consistently grades out as better, yet will probably re-sign for something like $5M less annually than what someone pays Bradley. Also, a back court rotation of Bradley-Murray, Parker-Forbes beyond this season, would be pint sized.
- Agree with Chinook, that failing a Walker trade, they should be open to moving the 1st for the right project big.
- If the Leonard news is true and the relationship proves irreparable, anyone who doesn't think Brown, Tatum, a 1st and salary filler, would be a good trade hasn't paid attention to most star trades.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BG_Spurs_Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by BG_Spurs_Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by BG_Spurs_Fan
Clearly, it would depend on their evaluation of Murray. I never said my proposal was great value, but it's highly unlikely they get that for reasons discussed as nauseam. 1) Star players rarely get traded for perceived good value (Gasol, Harden, Cousins, Butler, George, etc.), 2) He's a lesser star, playing the league's most saturated position, 3) They're determined to dump a bloated contract with him.
Give me Bradley and his versatility over Green any day! Kawhi isn’t being traded unless he demands it.......Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
Well, the part about the Bradley trade that is unclear at this point is if DET is wanting a player back (that is early indications). They dont want to get out of paying Bradley; they want to get out of paying Bradley because he has not fit well. If he was playing great I think they would be happy to re-sign him.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
It’s because of that they might want Mills. He provides shooting they really seem to need and is much cheaper than Bradley will be.
Speculation of course at this point, but it does not seem like DET just wants to shed salary yet.
:lol thinking ST trade proposals consider the other team's needs
for years we were trying to trade blair/bonner to teams...
It does seem that between other teams looking so good, things changing with SA and the general age that SA may be inclined to make a move. Even if it’s just to appease fans and “do something”.
They're paying Reggie Jackson (6-3), Ish Smith (6-0), and Langston Galloway (6-2) a guaranteed $28.6 million this year and $30 million for 18/19. And Jackson and Galloway still on the books for 19/20 at $25.4 million.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
I don't see how they'd want to add 6-0 Mills to that line-up and his 10.7 this year, 11.6 in 18/19, 12.4 in 19/20, and 13.3 in 20/21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atl Spur
Bradley is essentially a smaller, worse version of Green, with an inflated reputation.
That's why I specifically said "if the news is true and the relationship proves irreparable".
I'm not saying they wouldn't want a player back, I'm saying it's highly unlikely that player would be Mills. They have 2 backup back court shooters, in Galloway and Kennard. If they move Bradley, depending on the return, they could be without a single starting wing.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
Bradley isn't versatile. Green's been better than Avery in every way. It's even worse considering how terrible Bradley has been on offense this year. There's a reason Boston legit paid to get rid of him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Atl Spur
And they still brought in Bradley at the expense of letting both Morris AND KCP go to do so. They wanted another scoring guard (and one they thought/knew would probably warrant a sizeable pay increase).Quote:
Originally Posted by objective
The Pistons are about to enter tax territory, so they definitely aren't eager to pay guys. They are in cap hell due to a lot of mid-tier contracts rather than any really huge ones outside of Drummond. I think Patty's deal would be okay for them, but his skill-set wouldn't be. If Danny had that deal, the Pistons would likely take him and even add a bit. I don't think they'd do so now, considering that Green may even get more than Bradley on the open market given the scandal going on with Avery and the very real chance that Green will snap into legit contract-year mode if dealt.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
I wouldn't trade the 1st for a project big.
This upcoming draft is deep and loaded with bigs.
So were the previous two drafts. Hell, even the draft before that had some good bigs in the middle.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
How is this nigga frustrated with the Spurs?? Is this over the roster or his injury? I'm lost as fuckQuote:
Originally Posted by Spur|n|Austin
I'm guessing you didn't read the very short article I linked. It didn't say anything about him being frustrated with the Spurs.Quote:
Originally Posted by jermaine
True, but I'd rather save the 1st and the Spurs handpick their big and get the full 4-5 years of development, on a great salary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
Plus, 1st picks offer more value than past 1st round picks. 1st round picks are like new cars in that the value depreciates significantly after the first few months into their rookie deal unless they A) Get a lot of opportunity and B) Perform really well.
Spurs should be able to get a guy like Skal for something like Bertans or Kyle, rights to Milutinov, and a 2nd -- preserving the 1st.
Whispers coming out of the rumor mill are that Kawhi either feels that team doctors initially misdiagnosed his quad injury which has led to the current predicament, or that the FO isn't putting enough talent around him.Quote:
Originally Posted by jermaine
At this point, that's all they are...rumors.