Trade Idea: Would you?

WCS+Buddy for Cavs #7


  • Total voters
    23
#31
I guess it comes down to how you value WCS. If you think he is ourstarting center of the future and are very happy with that, then no need to take a Big youbwould just draft the Small forward we need and keep Buddy.

However, if you think WCS will never be an uper tier center in the league, but just average, and that Jackson/Bamba will be far superior players then maybe thats when you are more interested in packaging him for 1 more pick.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#32
I understand a lot of fans are ready to get the rebuild over and move forward. But i think here we would be trading 2 of our bench young guys due to poor fit and upgrading for a much higher quality prospect that fits the team better. I think the upside is much higher by turning WCS and Buddy into Porter Bridges Bridges or Bamba.

THEN we have our core and move forward. Its just we move forward with the superior core that would be finished swapping WCS and Buddy for the 7th.
1520739793596.jpg
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#34
So you would say no to WCS and Buddy for Ayton or Doncic then right? Grass is always greener kinda thing i guees. Why trade 2 knowns for just potential.
As others have said, amongst them being bajaden whose opinion on these things I hold in highest regard, at some point you have to QUIT always looking over the fence. Deal with your own grass and not what you see over there (especially if what you see is a bunch of bags of seed and not even real grass).

As far as trading for Ayton or Doncic, neither of them is going to be available at the 7, which is the question in the OP.
 

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#35
Now that's a 100 million + dollar question now, isn't it?

I honestly don't have a clue. I do think that some stars might look for a new home in near future. Paul George remains my favorite hope. While extremely extremely unlikely, if we pick someone like Ayton, he might consider us. There is also a chance that some other players like DMC, IT, even Kawahi (given some stories coming out of SA) might move or be moved. While I'm ruling out both IT and DMC, someone like PG or Kawahi would be awesome, but they remain more of a pipe dream. That said, if Spurs do decide to part ways with Kawahi, we are one of the few teams that can give them both some cap relief (say by absorbing Pau's salary), and multiple prospects to trigger their rebuild.

Finally, some players will likely become available as the season goes along. In recent times, players like DMC, Paul George, Kyrie have become available (including trades here) when no one was really expecting them to. Hopefully, we can pull off something if an opportunity presents itself.
too many hypothetical scenarios in your statement. George is either re-signing to play along side Russ or leaving to play home. Boogie loves playing with the Brow and they are good friends, they are staying a duo, unless the Pelicans screw that up. The situation with Kawhi might be as simple as what happened last off season with LeMarcus and establishing what kind of role he will play on the team and if they disagree, then a trade will be in the works but that's looking too far ahead.
 
#36
too many hypothetical scenarios in your statement. George is either re-signing to play along side Russ or leaving to play home. Boogie loves playing with the Brow and they are good friends, they are staying a duo, unless the Pelicans screw that up. The situation with Kawhi might be as simple as what happened last off season with LeMarcus and establishing what kind of role he will play on the team and if they disagree, then a trade will be in the works but that's looking too far ahead.
Agree on everything. We are a long shot away from being a long shot away for any star as of now :). That's the direction I want the franchise to take though, and not keep turning guys like Willie and Buddy into prospects.
 
#37
As others have said, amongst them being bajaden whose opinion on these things I hold in highest regard, at some point you have to QUIT always looking over the fence. Deal with your own grass and not what you see over there (especially if what you see is a bunch of bags of seed and not even real grass).

As far as trading for Ayton or Doncic, neither of them is going to be available at the 7, which is the question in the OP.
If you think our guys we have now are good enough to give us a shot at the promise land one day then i see your point in sticking with them. I just don't.

If you prefer or value the combination of WCS and Buddy over one of Birdges or Bamba or Jackson, then i can understand where you are coming from.

But the notion that the time for making changes to the roster is over and we should stop looking to improve the team and just deal with our own bags of seed that we have, as you put it, is a hard perspective for me to follow.

Using your bags of seed and pasture language, if we were trying to creat a landscape for a competition in a fair and want to win the gold ribbon, we would need to use a lot of different flowers and plants that compliment each other. WCS and Buddy are nice bags of flower seed, but we alreay have those same seeds in other bags. No one wins planting all the same seeds. So i would look to trade some of the redundant seed bags i have with the neighbor over the fence to get more variety. If i hae 3 bags of roses but no Tulips, id trade 2 rose bags for 1 bag of tulips because no one ever got the gold ribbon with roses alone.

I asked if you would trade WCS and Buddy for Ayton Ayton or Doncic because you implied trading for a prospect with our 2 proven assets was the bad decision. Bythat same logic you would refuse to trade them for Ayton or Doncic because they have proven just as much on an NBA court as Bamba Bridges Bridges or Jackson. But like i said, if you reject the trade because you dont like the prospect at 7 as much as WCS and Buddy that makes sense even if i dont agree.
 
Last edited:
#38
If you think our guys we have now are good enough to give us a shot at the promise land one day then i see your point in sticking with them. I just don't.

If you prefer or value the combination of WCS and Buddy over one of Birdges or Bamba or Jackson, then i can understand where you are coming from.

But the notion that the time for making changes to the roster is over and we should stop looking to improve the team and just deal with our own bags of seed that we have, as you put it, is a hard perspective for me to follow.

Using your bags of seed and pasture language, if we were trying to creat a landscape for a competition in a fair and want to win the gold ribbon, we would need to use a lot of different flowers and plants that compliment each other. WCS and Buddy are nice bags of flower seed, but we alreay have those same seeds in other bags. No one wins planting alm the same seeds. So i would look to trade some of the redundant seed bags i have with the neighbor over the fence to get more variety. If i hae 3 bags of roses but no Tulips, id trade 2 rose bags for 1 bag of tulips because no one ever got the gold ribbon with roses alone lol.

I asked if you would trade WCS and Buddy for Ayton Ayton or Doncic because you implied trading for a prospect with our 2 proven assets was the bad decision. Bythat same logic you would refuse to trade them for Ayton or Doncic because they have proven just as much on an NBA court as Bamba Bridges Bridges or Jackson. But like i said, if you reject the trade because you dont like the prospect at 7 as much as WCS and Buddy that makes sense even if i dont agree.
I would trade them for Ayton in a heart beat but no other team would be dumb enough to do it!
 
#39
[
. Sometimes I feel like I'm watching that game show where the contestant is sitting there with $50,000.00 that he's won, and he's being asked if he would want to trade it for what's behind door # 1, door # 2, or door # 3? Insanity!
The equivalent to your 50k here is the Kings having a roster you could safely say would get into the playoffs. But you don't win the big dance by not risking that 50K to go for it all. Maybe a lot of fans are happy with that. For me, id happily risk our chance of making the playoffs for the chance to be a contender again.


And if we are umdervaluing WCS or Buddy snd Cavs would make the trade with just 1 of those players and a future 1st plus salary or something from us then all the better. Id much prefer a deal centered on our future pick in 2021 plus salary dump to be the center of a trade that could get us Mikal or Miles Bridges.
 
Last edited:
#40
First let me say that I agree with the Capt 100%. At some point you have to develop a core group of players. You can't keep trading out one player for another in the future that you think, with emphasis on think, will be better than what your trading. Some of you are seriously under valuing Willie. I won't argue his weaknesses. There's no disputing his poor rebounding at times. And no, he doesn't block a lot of shots, but that has a lot of how he's used. To block shots you need to be protecting the basket, and Willie plays away from the basket for the most part on defense. And folks, that's by design.

Willie can do things on defense that Bamba will never be able to do, and that's not a criticism of Bamba. He simply doesn't have the lateral quickness that Willie has. And neither do most of the centers in the NBA. Willie is a freak of nature, who is still figuring out who he is as a basketball player. That means, that he still has a lot of upside left. He's just now starting to tap into his potential. Now is not the time to trade him. I'm not as high on Buddy as I'am Willie, but I'm not willing to throw in the towel on him just yet. His inconsistent shooting bothers me, but mostly its the dumb turnovers that he continues to make.

I wonder how long it would take before some of you would be proposing trading Bamba for some future pick, when you find out how limited he is in some areas. Yes, he'll probably block a lot of shots around the basket, but can he guard on the perimeter? What happens when an Anthony Davis pulls him away from the basket? You can't just stand under the basket and block shots in the NBA. They have that silly 3 second rule. I'm not saying he won't adapt. I think he will. I actually like Bamba. But I think he would set back the progress of this team more than a year or so.

If your going to make a serious move, you wait until you know what you have in Giles. What if Giles is a good shotblocker? I know he can rebound because I saw what he could do in limited minutes at Duke when he wasn't even back to health. He's reported to be a terrific passer as well. So what if he's the perfect compliment to Willie. If so, then you don't need a Bamba. Problem is, we don't have the answer to that yet and won't until next year some time. Sometimes I feel like I'm watching that game show where the contestant is sitting there with $50,000.00 that he's won, and he's being asked if he would want to trade it for what's behind door # 1, door # 2, or door # 3? Insanity!
That was the main purpose of this question: How much do you believe in our current core developing into something potentially great? And is it worth turning two potentially superfluous assets in WCS and Buddy that might be not be starters for us into a potentially great single asset that can compliment Fox/Bogdan/Skal even better? And if you believe in Giles, wouldn't clearing out WCS to make room for him make more sense?

I think this is the draft to do a trade like this and it would actually make sense in lieu of our situation with the rebuild. We'd actually give ourselves some time to build the team, rather than put all the eggs into the 2019 basket of having to win. I don't think we should be done with the rebuild.

And it in theory makes sense with a team like the Cavs who would want more "win now" pieces to go with another 3-4 year LeBron run. And WCS and Buddy are both young enough that it'd make sense for them long-term too.
 
#41
That was the main purpose of this question: How much do you believe in our current core developing into something potentially great? And is it worth turning two potentially superfluous assets in WCS and Buddy that might be not be starters for us into a potentially great single asset that can compliment Fox/Bogdan/Skal even better? And if you believe in Giles, wouldn't clearing out WCS to make room for him make more sense?

I think this is the draft to do a trade like this and it would actually make sense in lieu of our situation with the rebuild. We'd actually give ourselves some time to build the team, rather than put all the eggs into the 2019 basket of having to win. I don't think we should be done with the rebuild.

And it in theory makes sense with a team like the Cavs who would want more "win now" pieces to go with another 3-4 year LeBron run. And WCS and Buddy are both young enough that it'd make sense for them long-term too.
The only change id make to trade, is id prefer to use our 2021 1st and salary relief as the centerpiece of a deal for a top 10 pick this year.

Not sure if that would move the needle enough to make a trade happen, but i would start there and be targeting Mikal or Miles Bridges or Carter depending on who we draft with our pick.
 
#42
That was the main purpose of this question: How much do you believe in our current core developing into something potentially great? And is it worth turning two potentially superfluous assets in WCS and Buddy that might be not be starters for us into a potentially great single asset that can compliment Fox/Bogdan/Skal even better? And if you believe in Giles, wouldn't clearing out WCS to make room for him make more sense?

I think this is the draft to do a trade like this and it would actually make sense in lieu of our situation with the rebuild. We'd actually give ourselves some time to build the team, rather than put all the eggs into the 2019 basket of having to win. I don't think we should be done with the rebuild.

And it in theory makes sense with a team like the Cavs who would want more "win now" pieces to go with another 3-4 year LeBron run. And WCS and Buddy are both young enough that it'd make sense for them long-term too.
They already have Larry Nance whom seems to fit nicely into what they are doing and also just traded for Hood. You can argue that WCS and Buddy are better or worse players then Nance and Hood, but I think we can all agree it's not a big enough upgrade to give up the Nets pick.
 
#43
That was the main purpose of this question: How much do you believe in our current core developing into something potentially great? And is it worth turning two potentially superfluous assets in WCS and Buddy that might be not be starters for us into a potentially great single asset that can compliment Fox/Bogdan/Skal even better? And if you believe in Giles, wouldn't clearing out WCS to make room for him make more sense?

I think this is the draft to do a trade like this and it would actually make sense in lieu of our situation with the rebuild. We'd actually give ourselves some time to build the team, rather than put all the eggs into the 2019 basket of having to win. I don't think we should be done with the rebuild.

And it in theory makes sense with a team like the Cavs who would want more "win now" pieces to go with another 3-4 year LeBron run. And WCS and Buddy are both young enough that it'd make sense for them long-term too.
Cleveland would be stupid to make a trade based on King Drama returning he’s not and won’t commit
 
#44
They already have Larry Nance whom seems to fit nicely into what they are doing and also just traded for Hood. You can argue that WCS and Buddy are better or worse players then Nance and Hood, but I think we can all agree it's not a big enough upgrade to give up the Nets pick.
They already have Larry Nance whom seems to fit nicely into what they are doing and also just traded for Hood. You can argue that WCS and Buddy are better or worse players then Nance and Hood, but I think we can all agree it's not a big enough upgrade to give up the Nets pick.
Sure, but you can't tell me Buddy+WCS improves their 2-3 year window that they have left with LeBron. That'd be the whole point of a deal like this: get 2 more quality depth pieces that are approaching their primes within a season or 2 that fit like a glove next to Bron and Love rather than wait for a rookie to develop that probably won't affect winning in the LeBron era. And the fact that WCS and Buddy are still young to where they CAN fit into a longer rebuild makes even more sense for them.

Hill || Clarkson
Hood || Hield || JR Smith
Bron || Osman
Love ||
Nance || WCS || TT

Also, also, Hood is a RFA this year and not a guarantee to come back as he probably commands at least a 12 mil/season. Buddy with 2 years on his deal gives them that equal or maybe better production at a fraction of the cost.

If they don't think Bron is back, then yeah the deal doesn't make sense and you just take the rookie. But if you're trying to recruit Bron to stay, wouldn't he be happier having Buddy Hield and WCS over say... Mikal Bridges? Who do you think he'd rather play with the next 3 years?
 
#45
Would the Cavs do this deal?

I'm not convinced. Neither player would start for them and I doubt that's what they would want in exchange for their first round pick.

Even at 7 they would be potentially picking the player left from Young, Doncic, Porter, Bagley, Jackson, Bamba and Ayton. I'd rate these players chances as having a greater chance of an all star appearance than the players we send. Plus at seven they could consider Mikal Bridges (3 and D wing), Colin Sexton (compares to Bledsoe and Fox), Wendell Carter (compares to Al Horford), and Kevin Knox (a project but compares to Paul George). So there's options for them if they keep the pick.

For me, I think they'd want a starter in return for that pick. Perhaps Evan Fournier would be a possibility if they wanted a decent shooting guard to replace JR Smith. Alternatively maybe that pick could get them Aaron Gordon in a sign and trade, he's developed well enough to start at either forward spot to pair with LeBron. There's other teams that could offer more appealing players.

That aside, if we get offered their pick for Willie and Buddy we should take it. Willie is not a prolific scorer, rebounder or shot blocker. He's not a top defensive talent either. He's arguably better suited to an off the bench role, or a decent but fourth or fifth option starter. As for Buddy, he's found a good home on the bench and he's a scoring player with limited defense, that limits his value. If we could swap them for one of the top seven talents and build around a young trio of Fox, Porter and Jackson that could be very appealing for this team. Add Bogdanovic and Giles to that line up and there's something to get excited about, and that's without making other moves.
 

hrdboild

Hall of Famer
#46
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here... that grass might not be greener on the other side, but it certainly is cleaner! I'll trade my scraggly lawn for that well-manicured lawn and spend all that time I saved by not doing lawn chores just enjoying the view. I see no errors of logic in this plan. ;)

In this particular case ... I don't know. It depends how highly you think of Buddy and Willie I guess. I've got mixed feelings about both long-term. I don't mind trading 2 bench players for a starter or even a bench player and a starter for a high-level starter, especially if their overall skillset is a better fit. While it could be argued that the team just needs stability, sometimes teams do come together immediately once the right combination of talent is achieved even if most of them have never played together before. Look at Boston, Indiana and Philadelphia this year for example. Or heck, look at the 98-99 Kings: you have 2 rookies, a trade acquisition, and a free agent signing all joining in the same off-season and becoming the new core of the team instantly. Talent is the ultimate deciding point of how far you're going to go. I'd hate to miss out on acquiring something special because I was afraid to give away anything at all.

If Fox/Bogdanovic is the starting backcourt of the future and we're comfortable with that, how much value can we put on Buddy? He's a great shooter but his ceiling is elite sixth man in his current role. Willie is a starter now but is that because he's one of the best all-around bigs in the league or because we just don't have a lot of NBA ready talent at the position right now?It doesn't make sense to talk in abstracts about constantly trading in the players we have for younger prospects when the question was about this draft. If this is the talent pool -- Mo Bamba, Jaren Jackson Jr, Mikal Bridges, Miles Bridges, Michael Porter Jr, Wendell Carter Jr -- and you tell me I have the chance to add two of them at the cost of Buddy and Willie, yeah I probably do it. Bench shooter and athletic defensive specialist big are player types we can possibly add in free agency (and indeed have done so in the past). The list of 6 players above are guys we will never get in free agency. That's the simple math of this for me.

On the other hand, I don't think this is our best option. Trading just one of them to fill whichever hole we don't fill in the draft could allow us to upgrade our starting lineup without losing two young players. The trick then is if you can identify a player who you could trade for who is going to substantially improve and outpace their current trade value. That's not easy either. And you have to find a team willing to give up on that kind of player. Even harder. But realistically, I think the point is moot because Cleveland won't make that trade. Neither Willie nor Buddy are established veterans who are going to sway Lebron's decision to re-sign. Most rebuilding teams (and even non-rebuilding teams) want quality over quantity regardless and the potential marquee star power in the draft outweighs the blue collar qualities of a high-level roleplayer like Cauley-Stein or Hield (Vivek's infatuation notwithstanding). Remember we gave up Cousins for the #10 pick and Buddy Hield. If they do trade that #7 (ish) pick they're after much bigger fish than we can dangle.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#47
If you think our guys we have now are good enough to give us a shot at the promise land one day then i see your point in sticking with them. I just don't.

If you prefer or value the combination of WCS and Buddy over one of Birdges or Bamba or Jackson, then i can understand where you are coming from.

But the notion that the time for making changes to the roster is over and we should stop looking to improve the team and just deal with our own bags of seed that we have, as you put it, is a hard perspective for me to follow.

Using your bags of seed and pasture language, if we were trying to creat a landscape for a competition in a fair and want to win the gold ribbon, we would need to use a lot of different flowers and plants that compliment each other. WCS and Buddy are nice bags of flower seed, but we alreay have those same seeds in other bags. No one wins planting all the same seeds. So i would look to trade some of the redundant seed bags i have with the neighbor over the fence to get more variety. If i hae 3 bags of roses but no Tulips, id trade 2 rose bags for 1 bag of tulips because no one ever got the gold ribbon with roses alone.

I asked if you would trade WCS and Buddy for Ayton Ayton or Doncic because you implied trading for a prospect with our 2 proven assets was the bad decision. Bythat same logic you would refuse to trade them for Ayton or Doncic because they have proven just as much on an NBA court as Bamba Bridges Bridges or Jackson. But like i said, if you reject the trade because you dont like the prospect at 7 as much as WCS and Buddy that makes sense even if i dont agree.
I did not say, not did I even imply that the time for making changes to the roster is over. We have players we can get rid of. I don't necessarily think WCS or Buddy are amongst them, but if it's Ayton we're talking about, then I'd trade more than just WCS and/or Buddy. :p

Your last statement is totally correct.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#49
...On the other hand, I don't think this is our best option. Trading just one of them to fill whichever hole we don't fill in the draft could allow us to upgrade our starting lineup without losing two young players. The trick then is if you can identify a player who you could trade for who is going to substantially improve and outpace their current trade value. That's not easy either. And you have to find a team willing to give up on that kind of player. Even harder. But realistically, I think the point is moot because Cleveland won't make that trade. Neither Willie nor Buddy are established veterans who are going to sway Lebron's decision to re-sign. Most rebuilding teams (and even non-rebuilding teams) want quality over quantity regardless and the potential marquee star power in the draft outweighs the blue collar qualities of a high-level roleplayer like Cauley-Stein or Hield (Vivek's infatuation notwithstanding). Remember we gave up Cousins for the #10 pick and Buddy Hield. If they do trade that #7 (ish) pick they're after much bigger fish than we can dangle.
That's why I used that particular image. To some around here, it seems as though they're always looking on the other side of the fence. Instead of considering most of our team is young and learning, they seem to want to dump them for the next new prospect.
 

hrdboild

Hall of Famer
#50
That's why I used that particular image. To some around here, it seems as though they're always looking on the other side of the fence. Instead of considering most of our team is young and learning, they seem to want to dump them for the next new prospect.
Yeah I get that. And it's an important point to make. Though I don't think the people voting yes would characterize this particular trade as "dumping" anybody. Every one of the guys listed as a possibility at the #7 pick is a potential multi-year All Star. Certainly I would agree that the word "potentially" there is a huge catch. And you could make the point that every top 10 player in every draft is a "potential" multi-year All Star. A lot of those guys aren't even in the league anymore...

If I try to be objective though about the merits of the players involved, I like Willie as a top notch backup and spot starter with strong situational utility. That's a great piece to add to a monster All Star big man not the guy you hold onto instead of them. Buddy tops out for me as Eric Gordon. There's no overselling the importance of shooting in today's NBA and he's already one of the league's best at it. This is not a decision I take lightly. Porter Jr. is risky and Miles Bridges is the type of super athlete wrecking ball I tend to overvalue in the draft but Jackson, Bamba and Carter solve A LOT of our problems on both ends of the floor and so does Mikal Bridges. I would LOVE to see what we can do next year with two of these guys and a healthy Fox and Giles plus SuperBogie and a decent free agent. We might even be able to find a Willie/Buddy replacement with our high second rounder if we play our cards right.
 
#51
Yeah I get that. And it's an important point to make. Though I don't think the people voting yes would characterize this particular trade as "dumping" anybody. Every one of the guys listed as a possibility at the #7 pick is a potential multi-year All Star. Certainly I would agree that the word "potentially" there is a huge catch. And you could make the point that every top 10 player in every draft is a "potential" multi-year All Star. A lot of those guys aren't even in the league anymore...

If I try to be objective though about the merits of the players involved, I like Willie as a top notch backup and spot starter with strong situational utility. That's a great piece to add to a monster All Star big man not the guy you hold onto instead of them. Buddy tops out for me as Eric Gordon. There's no overselling the importance of shooting in today's NBA and he's already one of the league's best at it. This is not a decision I take lightly. Porter Jr. is risky and Miles Bridges is the type of super athlete wrecking ball I tend to overvalue in the draft but Jackson, Bamba and Carter solve A LOT of our problems on both ends of the floor and so does Mikal Bridges. I would LOVE to see what we can do next year with two of these guys and a healthy Fox and Giles plus SuperBogie and a decent free agent. We might even be able to find a Willie/Buddy replacement with our high second rounder if we play our cards right.
That'd be my line of thinking too. Someone like Nurkic would be a realistic get with Portland in cap hell and no obvious way out that you could pay and not worry about the looming 15+ mil WCS extension. Or maybe we get in the Randle race and force the Lakers to make a decision on him. Or it puts us in a position to actually use in a valuable manner and take on bad contracts for future picks, something we should have been trying to do last off-season in a full-blown rebuild.

And Buddy is absolutely starter quality, but I think he's just going to be stuck behind Bogdan, who's flat out just a better player. Where you can swing Bogdan to some 1 and to some 3, Buddy is tough because he's hard-stuck at that 2 guard with not enough handles to play the 1 and not enough size to play the 3.

But for arguments sake, we'll say we snag Mikal Bridges and Jaren Jackson with the two picks. Here's their ages at the start of next season:

Fox-20
Skal-22
Giles-20
Bridges-22
Jaren Jackson- 19 (September)
Justin Jackson-23
Bogdan-26
Mason- 24

Then potential Free Agent signings we could make a run at:
Nurkic-24 (August)
Randle-24 (November
Hezonja-23


So Bogdan becomes the elder statesman at the ripe old age of 26 with only him and Skal needing an extension after 2 more seasons. THAT to me is what a rebuilding core should look like: A whole lot of upside on both ends of the court, a team that theoretically should be great together in 2-3 years (Fox-Bogdan-Bridges-Skal/Giles-Jaren Jackson sounds so juicy to me) younger prospects with time to develop, and a completely clean cap sheet where we don't have to worry about paying any of the good young guys for awhile.

Basically, I think Vlade and Co are going to think we're "done" with the rebuild after this lotto pick and I hope we find a way to stay in the rebuilding zone to actually get this thing done right. Artificially inflating our win total next year so his egregious trade doesn't look as bad doesn't really interest me; that's a sunk cost and we shouldn't let that one trade affect the next 3-5 years of decision making.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#52
Yeah I get that. And it's an important point to make. Though I don't think the people voting yes would characterize this particular trade as "dumping" anybody. Every one of the guys listed as a possibility at the #7 pick is a potential multi-year All Star. Certainly I would agree that the word "potentially" there is a huge catch. And you could make the point that every top 10 player in every draft is a "potential" multi-year All Star. A lot of those guys aren't even in the league anymore...

If I try to be objective though about the merits of the players involved, I like Willie as a top notch backup and spot starter with strong situational utility. That's a great piece to add to a monster All Star big man not the guy you hold onto instead of them. Buddy tops out for me as Eric Gordon. There's no overselling the importance of shooting in today's NBA and he's already one of the league's best at it. This is not a decision I take lightly. Porter Jr. is risky and Miles Bridges is the type of super athlete wrecking ball I tend to overvalue in the draft but Jackson, Bamba and Carter solve A LOT of our problems on both ends of the floor and so does Mikal Bridges. I would LOVE to see what we can do next year with two of these guys and a healthy Fox and Giles plus SuperBogie and a decent free agent. We might even be able to find a Willie/Buddy replacement with our high second rounder if we play our cards right.
Fair enough.

Bottom line we both want the same end result. We just have differences in opinion of some of the best ways to get that result.

I'm tired of switching horses in midstream, of running from line to line in the store because one cashier appears to be faster. Trading for a proven commodity in the league would be one thing. Trading for someone who has never stepped foot on the court for an NBA team and you'd better be pretty sure you're not just trading because you're addicted to the thrill of the draft.
 
#53
Fair enough.

Bottom line we both want the same end result. We just have differences in opinion of some of the best ways to get that result.

I'm tired of switching horses in midstream, of running from line to line in the store because one cashier appears to be faster. Trading for a proven commodity in the league would be one thing. Trading for someone who has never stepped foot on the court for an NBA team and you'd better be pretty sure you're not just trading because you're addicted to the thrill of the draft.
Let me ask you.

Do you think:

Fox || Mason
Bogdan || Buddy
Justin Jackson
Skal || Giles
WCS

with the 2018 pick can be a top 4 seed in the west within 4 years?
 
#59
We don’t know what those players look like in 4 years
Using this logic, I could draft a bunch of late 2nd rounders and refuse to move them in a trade because I don't know what these players will look like in 4 years.

The sense that we can't trade players when we don't know exactly what type of player they will become is lunacy. If you are more confident in XYZ player to become a better player than Hield/Cauley-Stein, you do the deal.

Is there a chance that Hield or Cauley-Stein will be better players than player XYZ? Sure, there is a chance, but just because there is a chance, it doesn't mean you should play against the odds.
 
#60
I'm not convinced at all that WCS and Buddy are core pieces on a perennial playoff team. This is coming from a huge Buddy supporter/defender. Kings fans like to dismiss age for whatever reason, but their ages are completely relevant in discussions. They're 4 years older than Fox who is our supposed franchise player.

If they showed more than 12pts a game, then MAYBE I would think differently.. But when 37yearold ZBo is better than them at 24, it's hard to call me impressed.