Draft night trade scenario (Thompson for Jennings?)

[Kingster]

Yeah, that is wit, all right.....

It's an elegant equation.

 

[tradepeja]

I really hate how biased this forum is towards JT. He's really not THAT good. He's BARELY a 14/10 guy when he plays 35-40 minutes. Not to mention he is already 22, almost 23 I believe.

If we got Griffin, I would trade him for Jennings immediately.

Some truth said here. JT's ceiling isn't all that high. If we get Griffin, almost any sort of JT draft day trade should be seriously thought over.

I have a sneaking feeling somehow GP is going to redeem himself this off-season. Its the 10 year anniversary of the last time he did anything smart. Let's see him land Ricky and Blake. I BELIEVE.

 

[bajaden]

I really hate how biased this forum is towards JT. He's really not THAT good. He's BARELY a 14/10 guy when he plays 35-40 minutes. Not to mention he is already 22, almost 23 I believe.

If we got Griffin, I would trade him for Jennings immediately.

Its not about being biased, its about whether we think Jennings is good enough risk to warrant trading Thompson. I don't happen to think so. That doesn't mean I wouldn't trade him if the right deal came along.

As for as how good he is, the dude has only played one year in the NBA. He was a rookie. What the heck do you expect from him his first year. Most people around the league now think he was a steal at the spot we drafted him. The golden rule with big men and point guards is that it takes three years for them to fully develop. Sometimes longer for pt guards. And please don't throw Chris Paul at me. He's the exception not the rule.

With your line of thinking, if we draft Griffin and trade Thompson, next year at this time you'll be asking us to trade Griffin because you don't think he'll be any good based on what he did his first year.

 

[Dreadnought]

Its not about being biased, its about whether we think Jennings is good enough risk to warrant trading Thompson. I don't happen to think so. That doesn't mean I wouldn't trade him if the right deal came along.

As for as how good he is, the dude has only played one year in the NBA. He was a rookie. What the heck do you expect from him his first year. Most people around the league now think he was a steal at the spot we drafted him. The golden rule with big men and point guards is that it takes three years for them to fully develop. Sometimes longer for pt guards. And please don't throw Chris Paul at me. He's the exception not the rule.

With your line of thinking, if we draft Griffin and trade Thompson, next year at this time you'll be asking us to trade Griffin because you don't think he'll be any good based on what he did his first year.

You are putting words into my mouth throughout your post.

JT did not impress me as much as I feel he could have. He is already 3-4 years older than most prospects who enter the NBA. So yes, it is a big deal if you feel it takes 3 years to develop a big man, since he's already 23. I would much rather have a big man developed at 23 than one at 26. Heck, I know there are superstar players out there, but he's already older or just as old as most of the big names now.

And our forum is very biased towards JT. I believe during the Amare Stoudemire talks, much of the board would rather keep JT than trade him for Amare, which to be fully honest, would be a stupid move if the opportunity came.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

You are putting words into my mouth throughout your post.

JT did not impress me as much as I feel he could have. He is already 3-4 years older than most prospects who enter the NBA. So yes, it is a big deal if you feel it takes 3 years to develop a big man, since he's already 23. I would much rather have a big man developed at 23 than one at 26.

And our forum is very biased towards JT. I believe during the Amare Stoudemire talks, much of the board would rather keep JT than trade him for Amare, which to be fully honest, would be a stupid move if the opportunity came.

I mostly side with you here, although because JT grew so quickly and has changed positions, I think he has higher upside than a typical player his age. Overall though, I think Chad Ford summarized it well in his ESPN chat this afternoon:


Sam Miami, Fl: If the Kings receive the number 1 pick everyone is saying they are taking Griffin. I don't get why they would do that, they selected Jason Thompson who I believe has a tremendous upside last year. And we are currently in a time dominated by point guards which the Kings badly need. Why not take Rubio who looks like he can be a potential star in this league?

Chad Ford: Because Jason Thompson is not Blake Griffin. Remember a few years ago when the Blazers passed on Chris Paul and Deron Williams because they already had a point guard (Sebastian Telfair). How did that work out for them? You should never draft for need when there is a superior talent out there. But I do agree that Rubio would be a good fit in Sacramento and is the most likely pick for them at No. 2 if they get it.

http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=26544

 

[BMiller52]

Guess we don't have to worry about trading my boy JT

 

[tradepeja]

Just lock this thread. Its sad now.

 

[Aenadin]

marco jaric
rubio

for

Jason thompson
Beno udrih
31st

it works


our line up would be

Rubio
Martin
Nocioni
Hill
Hawes

i likeit!

 

[Jespher]

Jordan Hill does not impress me at all...