Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 116
  1. #76
    Veteran Ariel's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Post Count
    1,137
    That does not make any sense. 1) Richardson played lights out with SA so his value is up. 2) It’s not about Spurs having best offer, but the value in moving back 2 or 3 spots for POR. Going from pick 7 back a few spots, whether with SA or not, is not a huge deal unless POR for some reason values someone so much higher at 7 than picks 8-10 which would be odd considering how majority of people view them.
    1) Richardson outperformed expectations from Spurs fans, but you make it seem like he just earned finals MVP. He might have shot better from 3 pt range (in a limited sample) than he did before (although he was shooting almost 40% when the Celtics traded him to us), but otherwise he didn't do anything he hadn't done before. Plus it's a one year rental we're talking about, since he's a FA in a year.
    2) Consensus would have had us trading back if we wanted to grab Primo, yet the FO took him at 12. So just because "consensus" says the draft is flat, doesn't mean it is to Portland. And, more often than not, the team picking doesn't want to risk their preferred choice.
    Also, the value of your offer is relative to what the others are offering, because even if they like 9+Richardson, they might like 10/11 + something else better, and I don't think it's that difficult for someone to put together a better offer than that.

    So all in all, for that offer (9 + Richardson) to be successful, all of these would have to happen:
    1) Portland not trading the pick away for an established big forward like Jerami Grant. Good chance they do.
    2) Portland willing to risk their preferred choice by trading back. Who knows, but history says they may not.
    3) Portland not receiving a better offer than that. Speculative, IMO they can do better than a 1 year rental of Richardson.
    So yes, considering there's a good chance at least one of those premises don't hold true, I'd say it's quite unlikely that scenario could come to fruition.

  2. #77
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    74,755
    1) Richardson outperformed expectations from Spurs fans, but you make it seem like he just earned finals MVP. He might have shot better from 3 pt range (in a limited sample) than he did before (although he was shooting almost 40% when the Celtics traded him to us), but otherwise he didn't do anything he hadn't done before. Plus it's a one year rental we're talking about, since he's a FA in a year.
    2) Consensus would have had us trading back if we wanted to grab Primo, yet the FO took him at 12. So just because "consensus" says the draft is flat, doesn't mean it is to Portland. And, more often than not, the team picking doesn't want to risk their preferred choice.
    Also, the value of your offer is relative to what the others are offering, because even if they like 9+Richardson, they might like 10/11 + something else better, and I don't think it's that difficult for someone to put together a better offer than that.

    So all in all, for that offer (9 + Richardson) to be successful, all of these would have to happen:
    1) Portland not trading the pick away for an established big forward like Jerami Grant. Good chance they do.
    2) Portland willing to risk their preferred choice by trading back. Who knows, but history says they may not.
    3) Portland not receiving a better offer than that. Speculative, IMO they can do better than a 1 year rental of Richardson.
    So yes, considering there's a good chance at least one of those premises don't hold true, I'd say it's quite unlikely that scenario could come to fruition.
    Those are two different arguments: the main one is acting like moving back from 7 to 9 is a massive deal. I dont think it is specifically for a team like POR that wants to balance winning now + future. There are not many teams with picks so close to theirs that can also offer a win now player. So if they are willing to just outright dump their pick 7 for Grant, they likely dont value the player at 7 all that much. They may want to hedge (help win now while still getting a lottery pick).

    I agree that the second argument, will SA be the best offer, is way more up for debate.

  3. #78
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Post Count
    3,335
    What’s funny? Plenty of teams may view Doug as a + shooter on a team trying to win now. Moving from 7 to 9 is literally nothing….I agree Doug sucks but this board does not represent the entirety of the NBA opinion
    Lots of differing opinions on Doug here...I'm in the smallest minority though...I think Doug has value ...its just that it is for a contending team needing shooting off the bench....that isn't us but it's value to some teams...

  4. #79
    The Great Eight Ocotillo's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Post Count
    3,550
    I am all for moving McBuckets but I don't see it as the end of the world if we don't get any takers. Before injury he was starting and he has no business starting with his weakness at defense. Add to the mix Keldon is in theory your power forward and the combination of McBuckets and Keldon create a lot to be desired by your forwards since they are not producing the defense and boards you want/need from those positions. Go get an NBA 4 and bring McBuckets of the bench and other than being an overpaid Steve Kerr, he fits nicely into the role of spread the floor shooter coming off the bench.

  5. #80
    The Great Eight Ocotillo's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Post Count
    3,550
    And who knows, if he is in the right role, maybe a contender sees they could use someone in that role and you end up moving him.

  6. #81
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Post Count
    12,094
    I think trading up to 6 though should be relatively easy if SA values Keegan though…should not be that hard to move up. Especially if its with POR at pick 7. You can trade Doug McDermott or Richardson + 9 for pick 7 + filler and that gets POR a win now piece and still a lottery pick for now/future for example.
    Murray is tailormade for both the Pacers and Trail Blazers and projected firmly in the second tier unlike whoever is projected to be available at 9. Neither, especially the latter who are win now, would pass that up for Richardson.

    My guess is it would take something like this to get them to contemplate, if not execute . . .

    To Hornets: Poeltl, 25
    To Pacers: Washington Jr., 9, 20
    To Spurs: Jones, 6, 15

  7. #82
    Make a trade steal
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Post Count
    8,805
    Murray is tailormade for both the Pacers and Trail Blazers and projected firmly in the second tier unlike whoever is projected to be available at 9. Neither, especially the latter who are win now, would pass that up for Richardson.

    My guess is it would take something like this to get them to contemplate, if not execute . . .

    To Hornets: Poeltl, 25
    To Pacers: Washington Jr., 9, 20
    To Spurs: Jones, 6, 15
    I like that trade

  8. #83
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    74,755
    Lots of differing opinions on Doug here...I'm in the smallest minority though...I think Doug has value ...its just that it is for a contending team needing shooting off the bench....that isn't us but it's value to some teams...
    I don’t like anymore one dimensional vets on long term deals. If he made 1 year 40m I wouldn’t have cared. But signing tall Marco to multiple years was very dumb

  9. #84
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    74,755
    Murray is tailormade for both the Pacers and Trail Blazers and projected firmly in the second tier unlike whoever is projected to be available at 9. Neither, especially the latter who are win now, would pass that up for Richardson.

    My guess is it would take something like this to get them to contemplate, if not execute . . .

    To Hornets: Poeltl, 25
    To Pacers: Washington Jr., 9, 20
    To Spurs: Jones, 6, 15
    So Poetl, 9, 20 and 25 to move up 3 spots from 9 and to 15 from 25? No way. I’d move Poetl + 25 for picks 13 AND 15 (we keep 20). But no way I move Jakob + 20 + 25 for 15 that’s awful.

  10. #85
    Veteran RC_Drunkford's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Post Count
    8,865
    lol @ people here thinking NBA teams value a 21 year old draft pick so much that you can only move up 3 spots in the draft by trading Dejounte Murray for him

  11. #86
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    2,158
    More I think about, less I'm enamored with him based on current roster make up.

  12. #87
    Believe. Ignazzz's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    239
    What’s funny? Plenty of teams may view Doug as a + shooter on a team trying to win now. Moving from 7 to 9 is literally nothing….I agree Doug sucks but this board does not represent the entirety of the NBA opinion
    Funny? Tragic.
    his salary
    3x13.750.000
    it is minus asset

  13. #88
    Believe. Ignazzz's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    239
    2 years left

  14. #89
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    1,106
    To be fair McD would not be a major consideration for most teams in off season. They might consider him at trade deadline if they deemed that they need a shooter to improve their post season chance.

  15. #90
    Veteran BG_Spurs_Fan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    4,951
    Message board folks always vastly overrate or vastly underrate the value of players from the teams they support. McDermott isn't negative value unless the Spurs are in a hurry to clear cap space for FAs in early july. Lots of people thought the Spurs would have done well to simply salary dump White or DDR - both brought back a good return.

    I don't think there is a huge difference between picks 6 and 9, or between 6 and 14 for that matter. It's a flat draft. Now, perhaps the Spurs fall in love with some prospect but we can't know or speculate about such things.

  16. #91
    Veteran Dejounte's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    11,511
    Why do folks insist on pretending to know what will happen when they don’t?

  17. #92
    Veteran KobesAchilles's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Post Count
    2,741
    Why do folks insist on pretending to know what will happen when they don’t?
    It’s fun to surmise

  18. #93
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Post Count
    3,335
    Why do folks insist on pretending to know what will happen when they don’t?
    Exactly...the only thing that's certain around the draft right now is that the mocks will change between now and draft day...

  19. #94
    Make a trade steal
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Post Count
    8,805
    Message board folks always vastly overrate or vastly underrate the value of players from the teams they support. McDermott isn't negative value unless the Spurs are in a hurry to clear cap space for FAs in early july. Lots of people thought the Spurs would have done well to simply salary dump White or DDR - both brought back a good return.

    I don't think there is a huge difference between picks 6 and 9, or between 6 and 14 for that matter. It's a flat draft. Now, perhaps the Spurs fall in love with some prospect but we can't know or speculate about such things.
    I think there is a big difference in this draft between 6 and 9 unless a team or two makes a surprise pick and reaches for a player but that is unlikely to happen the higher you go in the draft.

    I'd rather the Spurs had the option to draft Murray, Sharpe or Mathurin than Sochan, Davis, Daniels.

  20. #95
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Post Count
    12,094
    So Poetl, 9, 20 and 25 to move up 3 spots from 9 and to 15 from 25? No way. I’d move Poetl + 25 for picks 13 AND 15 (we keep 20). But no way I move Jakob + 20 + 25 for 15 that’s awful.
    Coming from a guy who thinks Richardson could get you from 9 to 7 and it'd be wise to trade a quality starter for two picks likely to yield mediocrity (when they already have two further down likely to do so), that's a compliment.

    You're consumed with the differential in spots, but the draft is about tiers and for a team with quan y of prospects and in dire need of quality of them, my goal would be to come out of this draft with two quality pieces (one could be a prime or young veteran).

  21. #96
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    5,660
    I think Indiana is a real threat to take Murray and I wouldn't discount Sacramento either... I really expect Portland to trade #7 to get a more nba ready player to pair with Dame....that new team is a wildcard since we don't know who may try to move up...it could even be us...
    I agree with this. Can see SAC trading the pick OR pairing Murray with Sabonis. I suppose DET then jumps at Ivy. Can also potentially see them landing another top 10 pick at 7 in a deal with POR for Grant. Totally agree that POR is aggressively shopping that one.

  22. #97
    The Dude minds DPG21920's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    74,755
    Coming from a guy who thinks Richardson could get you from 9 to 7 and it'd be wise to trade a quality starter for two picks likely to yield mediocrity (when they already have two further down likely to do so), that's a compliment.

    You're consumed with the differential in spots, but the draft is about tiers and for a team with quan y of prospects and in dire need of quality of them, my goal would be to come out of this draft with two quality pieces (one could be a prime or young veteran).
    Yes. Richardson + 9 for 7 is far more realistic than what you just said. Don’t take it personal lol.

  23. #98
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Post Count
    12,094
    Yes. Richardson + 9 for 7 is far more realistic than what you just said. Don’t take it personal lol.
    Not even close. Your fake trades are always slanted in favor of the Spurs.

  24. #99
    Make a trade steal
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Post Count
    8,805
    Not even close. Your fake trades are always slanted in favor of the Spurs.
    I don't know why people think Richardson has so much value.

  25. #100
    Body Of Work Mr. Body's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    19,230
    Yeah, I don't think Richardson has incredible value right now. We just saw what the market suggests he's worth -- it took him, a first round draft pick, and a nearly unprotected swap, to get Derrick White. I treat Langford as a salary throw in.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •