Hypothetical 2012 Trade Deadline: Is Draymond Green Worth Three Years of RJ?

[gambit1990]

I don't think I've ever seen another poster hitch their wagon to such a failure of a trade idea as you have. I bet you still watch HD DVDs as well. Let it go, man.

you were the one who wanted to keep parker over dragic

and you're wrong again, btw... i was never into hd dvd, ps3 meant blu ray.

chinook still typing all out these paragraphs... all the original post had to say was: "would you guys give up a championship for a chance at draymond? no? me either."

[Chinook]

you were the one who wanted to keep parker over dragic

and you're wrong again, btw... i was never into hd dvd, ps3 meant blu ray.

chinook still typing all out these paragraphs... all the original post had to say was: "would you guys give up a championship for a chance at draymond? no? me either."

ing about having to read multiple paragraphs
ing about tl;dr les despite being scared of paragraphs
ing about a person presenting the other side of an argument
STILL trying to push that ty illogical trade

[daslicer]

Draymond is crap I don't get why people really want him. He's a system player that benefits from playing with the league's most popular team. I doubt the refs would allow Draymond to get away with the fouling he does on defense if he was on the Spurs. Also factor in Draymond is a big time talker in the lockerroom which would get him kicked off the team. No way would Pop take from Draymond like Kerr does. The moment Draymond would mouth off to Pop is the moment he's either waived or on a bus towards Austin.

[hater]

what if steve jobs had not died ?

[Emperor]

What if Manu didn't foul Dirk in '06? What if Kawhi made his free throws in '13? What if ****** made his in '95? What if Strickland didn't make that stupid pass in '90. Too many to think of for me.

[gambit1990]

chinook in this thread: "would you guys give up a championship for a chance at draymond? no? me either, but let me write 10 paragraphs about it anyways."

hopefully the next thread you make won't be as utterly pointless as this one.

[Chinook]

chinook in this thread: "would you guys give up a championship for a chance at draymond? no? me either, but let me write 10 paragraphs about it anyways."

hopefully the next thread you make won't be as utterly pointless as this one.

Leave it up to you to have ty reading comprehension.

[SAGirl]

That's really what's unknowable Chinook: the chemistry issue. As others above this post said it's unknown how Raymond would have developed under Pop. He's a hot head now, but Pop breaks rookies down b4 they even get in the rotation. It's possible he might have turned out great and actually provided leadership and a compe ive fire the team kind of needs in their young crop. But playing with a ball dominant Manu and Tony back in the day Raymond would not have been developed into a top player. Heck took Kawhi 5 seasons to burst out the door as a top player and command the ball and that was with the big 3 limping on one leg metaphorically. And he was heralded the franchise heir from a young stage.

I go back to Raymond bc Jefferson is superfluous. He and SJAX wouldn't have played a big part in the championship and Jefferson could have taken the Belli role and been fine. Belli was not significant in any defensive area whatsoever.

But can't address the Jefferson chemistry issue. I won't comment on that bc I don't know.

[MolaMola790]

The Hate RJ gets here is ridiclous. clearly he was a disappointment but wasn't nearly as bad as people make him out to be...holy crap

[dabom]

This guy would have kept DWORST.


At starting Center.

[dabom]

Can mods move this POS to the "ThinkTank"?

[dabom]

Lets ask Tim Duncan what he thinks about this.

[dabom]

Inb4dalock

[dabom]

13 people have so far voted and mtfkr OP didn't even make it public. POS thread.

[cd98]

Did the Olympics prove that D. Green is a system player?

[Chinook]

The Hate RJ gets here is ridiclous. clearly he was a disappointment but wasn't nearly as bad as people make him out to be...holy crap

Truth bomb from my fellow fish-themed poster.

[gambit1990]

This guy would have kept DWORST.


At starting Center.

no way, did he really say he'd start him at center?

Can mods move this POS to the "ThinkTank"?

tbh. chinook goes out of the way to ask an irrelevant but possibly controversial question that only chinook could think of... and then he takes the most vanilla take

"i too disagree with the question i pose in the thread's le but here's some of paragraphs about why i too disagree with the question i pose in the thread's le"

chinook had this to say in the last paragraph of his original post:

There aren't many things I'd trade 2014 for, and Draymond isn't one of them.

that's all his original post had to say

[dabom]

no way, did he really say he'd start him at center?


tbh. chinook goes out of the way to ask an irrelevant but possibly controversial question that only chinook could think of... and then he takes the most vanilla take

"i too disagree with the question i pose in the thread's le but here's some of paragraphs about why i too disagree with the question i pose in the thread's le"

chinook had this to say in the last paragraph of his original post:

that's all his original post had to say

Yeah he said that. In more than on thread.

I mean theirs so many hypotheticals withing this hypothetical. Makes no sense for anything.

[Chinook]

no way, did he really say he'd start him at center?


tbh. chinook goes out of the way to ask an irrelevant but possibly controversial question that only chinook could think of... and then he takes the most vanilla take

"i too disagree with the question i pose in the thread's le but here's some of paragraphs about why i too disagree with the question i pose in the thread's le"

chinook had this to say in the last paragraph of his original post:

that's all his original post had to say

I guess we can't all be insightful enough to bump the same thread over and over despite the fact that nothing changed or to try to circle-jerk with the forum's soggy biscuit. I can see why you are scared of paragraphs if you think making five one-sentence posts in a row is hilarious.

[dabom]

13 hours and no one else has voted.

I could literally put a fathead vs Simmons minutes allocation thread and get more votes in an hour.

[GSH]

I think I'd go with the former. There aren't many things I'd trade 2014 for, and Draymond isn't one of them. Dude's a huge question mark despite his talent. There's no guarantee that he'd mesh with the team or be as good, and as we saw last season, being the best team on paper doesn't win LOBs. I'll take a trophy and a 7/10 future over just a 9/10 future any day.

If the question is whether it would have been better to draft Draymond, instead of signing SJax, then of course the answer is yea. Signing Jackson was a bust. But getting rid of Jefferson's bloated contract was not. Like CJW said, re-signing Danny was a BIG priority for the FO (that I got first-hand), and without spinning off that albatross contract, there's a good chance they lose Danny. Would having a young Draymond on the roster have made the difference in that 2013 Championship? Probably not. He didn't do a whole lot for GSW that first season. And like you said, without things falling the way they did, the '14 Championship might not have come together.

If you want to play "what-if", the Spurs could have signed Chandler Parsons (or Jimmy Butler) and Isaiah Thomas in 2011, instead of CoJo and Hanga. Or if they had drafted Patty Mills instead of Nando. Maybe Jerebko or Marcus Thornton in place of Blair. Those might have made a difference in the past. Having Draymond on the roster now would be a plus for the future, but I sure as wouldn't trade '14 to get him, and he wouldn't have made the difference in '13. It's the LOB's that matter.

[GSH]

I can see why you are scared of paragraphs if you think making five one-sentence posts in a row is hilarious.

A lot of the time his whole posts consist of an emoji. If he's really got something to say, he'll double up on the emoji, because two ROTFL's is a lot stronger than one. , a lot of times he'll start a new ing thread that's nothing but a le and an emoji. The key is to make the thread le controversial, so he gets lots of attention.

Get rid of one guy and about three alts, and this place gets 100% better overnight. (Now... cue the storm from that one guy and his three alts.)

[FuzzyLumpkins]

We also saved ~$11m on the deal which allowed us to make a run at Gasol and keep Mills and Diaw.

[Chinook]

If the question is whether it would have been better to draft Draymond, instead of signing SJax, then of course the answer is yea. Signing Jackson was a bust. But getting rid of Jefferson's bloated contract was not. Like CJW said, re-signing Danny was a BIG priority for the FO (that I got first-hand), and without spinning off that albatross contract, there's a good chance they lose Danny. Would having a young Draymond on the roster have made the difference in that 2013 Championship? Probably not. He didn't do a whole lot for GSW that first season. And like you said, without things falling the way they did, the '14 Championship might not have come together.

If you want to play "what-if", the Spurs could have signed Chandler Parsons (or Jimmy Butler) and Isaiah Thomas in 2011, instead of CoJo and Hanga. Or if they had drafted Patty Mills instead of Nando. Maybe Jerebko or Marcus Thornton in place of Blair. Those might have made a difference in the past. Having Draymond on the roster now would be a plus for the future, but I sure as wouldn't trade '14 to get him, and he wouldn't have made the difference in '13. It's the LOB's that matter.

Well, there are two things here:

First, Jefferson made about $100k less than Jack did in 2012-2013, so the trade actually added salary to their bill. They still could've afforded to sign Green. The following season, sure, Jefferson's $11 Million was larger than the $4.5 Million Beli and Ayres cost, but the team was $7 Million under the tax line (see Bruno's Thread for more details), so there was enough room then too. Obviously, after that it wasn't a factor, as RJ's deal was done. While we can talk about whether Green or Leonard would've been hurt on the court by Jefferson, it doesn't look like they couldn't both be re-signed.

And that ignores the possibility of RJ opting out after being a rotation player on a contender rather than a waste of a roster spot in Utah.

Second is that as I have mentioned before, the Jefferson factor is getting overlooked. He eventually turned into the three-and-D role-player Pop envisioned, though he was never as good as Green. Having three good defenders and another shooter would've helped a lot in the 2013 Finals, where Pop had to tighten his rotation to like seven players. In 2014, who knows how they do without the loss to fuel them, but on paper, they'd've been the favorites once again.

People look at this thread as, "Would you trade a le for Draymond?" when it's really more complicated than that. I think the chances of the Spurs winning at least one ring from 2012-2014 without that trade are still near 100 percent.

[GSH]

Well, there are two things here:

First, Jefferson made about $100k less than Jack did in 2012-2013, so the trade actually added salary to their bill. They still could've afforded to sign Green. The following season, sure, Jefferson's $11 Million was larger than the $4.5 Million Beli and Ayres cost, but the team was $7 Million under the tax line (see Bruno's Thread for more details), so there was enough room then too. Obviously, after that it wasn't a factor, as RJ's deal was done. While we can talk about whether Green or Leonard would've been hurt on the court by Jefferson, it doesn't look like they couldn't both be re-signed.

Except that they only had to pay Jackson for one year, and RJ still had two albatross years left on his contract. If you want to look at signing a single player in a vacuum, have at it. But you're smarter than that. You're a ing argument addict. Even when people agree with you, you have to find a way to correct them. There's a point where being knowledgeable turns into being an asshole.

And that ignores the possibility of RJ opting out after being a rotation player on a contender rather than a waste of a roster spot in Utah.

RJ played all 82 games in Utah, logged over 2,200 minutes, and shot .409 from 3P. He was probably less of a waste of roster space there than most places, because they obviously needed him on the floor... a lot.

He eventually turned into the three-and-D role-player Pop envisioned, though he was never as good as Green. Having three good defenders and another shooter would've helped a lot in the 2013 Finals, where Pop had to tighten his rotation to like seven players. In 2014, who knows how they do without the loss to fuel them, but on paper, they'd've been the favorites once again.

He had the second worst DRTG on the Cavs, next to Dellavadova. He made .5 3-pointers per game in the playoffs, compared to .9 for the season. (Actually 11 3-pointers in 21 playoff games.) He played well in the post-season, especially against the W's small lineups. But he didn't "turn into" anything. And I'm pretty sure Pop didn't envision him being a role-player, since he had RJ starting damn near every game he played in SA.

People look at this thread as, "Would you trade a le for Draymond?" when it's really more complicated than that. I think the chances of the Spurs winning at least one ring from 2012-2014 without that trade are still near 100 percent.

Well if that's what you wanted the thread to be about, why didn't you ing say so? And there is no "near 100 percent" when it comes to winning a Championship. Chemistry and match-ups are always big factors. Just ask Golden State.

The fact is, RJ's performance while he was here was , which is why the Spurs had to give up a first round pick to get rid of him. And don't forget that he was a waste of a roster spot in Utah, just a couple of years before. So he evolved into the player Pop envisioned, suddenly, in his 15th season? Tell me another story, Grampa.