Trade Chatter

Love DMC. Hes a great player and if he can stay healthy will be deadly for the Hawks.

Love the deal for BI, DMC is an epic big and his IQ wont be a problem. With a guy like him in the paint you will play a slow pace anyway to feed him as much as possible. Just not sure if Kemba is the PG you need to get Cousins involved as much as possible. At least DMC will clean up all Walker misses,lol:D

DennisJ (BOS) wrote:Love the deal for BI, DMC is an epic big and his IQ wont be a problem. With a guy like him in the paint you will play a slow pace anyway to feed him as much as possible. Just not sure if Kemba is the PG you need to get Cousins involved as much as possible. At least DMC will clean up all Walker misses,lol:D

+1 DMC might turn the ball over a few times, but you can make up for that with your team creating turnovers. DMC when healthy is a top tier big, as is Monroe. I think DQ was more tired of DMC being hurt than anything. Consistency is a big thing in basketball.

LakeshowAK7 (LAL) wrote:

DennisJ (BOS) wrote:Love the deal for BI, DMC is an epic big and his IQ wont be a problem. With a guy like him in the paint you will play a slow pace anyway to feed him as much as possible. Just not sure if Kemba is the PG you need to get Cousins involved as much as possible. At least DMC will clean up all Walker misses,lol:D

+1 DMC might turn the ball over a few times, but you can make up for that with your team creating turnovers.  DMC when healthy is a top tier big, as is Monroe.  I think DQ was more tired of DMC being hurt than anything. Consistency is a big thing in basketball.

Didnt want to say its a bad one for DQ, it is a great one for Denver, no doubt. Especially if DQ is able to raise Monroe FG% and with Jrue at PG he should be able to. Just like it slightly more for BI.

Wow, did not expect DMC to leave Denver anytime soon. Understand the deal for both sides, but like it more for Hielo Negro.

Riot (MKE) wrote:Wow, did not expect DMC to leave Denver anytime soon. Understand the deal for both sides, but like it more for Hielo Negro.

LOL   
Sounds like someone out of Breaking Bad  

Riot (MKE) wrote:

Cuidado con el Hielo Negro!   

Maybe he'll be a character on Better Call Saul!

So when do the trades get updated?  

I actually don't mind the trade for the Nuggets. Gets them two 1sts, although late, but still. Decent haul for someone who they didn't necessarily see in their plans.

Wow, that's a lot of players moving in one trade...

It's nice that Atlanta got rid of Pek I guess, and they got the 2 best players in the trade imo, but with Tony Parker clearly the starting point guard now, where does Kemba fit in? They've turned a young team with a lot of potential into a (fairly) veteran team where what you see is what you get. Harrison and TRob are all that's left, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them leave either. Not sure of the point because I'm not sure Parker - Kemba - Smith - Barnes/Robinson - DMC gets them any closer to contending than Kemba - Barnes - Anderson - Momroe/Smith - Pek does. A lot of value here, but the revolving door of players continues... not sure if it's worth it.

Denver gave up the best player in the trade, and took on Pek's contract. Don't really like it. Even if you think you won't be contending, trading for a guy like Pek just hurts that. Decent guy on a big contract, not good for rebuilding. They got Boston's pick though, so that's good I guess.

Pretty indifferent about what Milwaukee did. Neither here nor there. Gasol probably wasn't the best guy for a team at the bottom of the East.

As for Dallas, huh? So you're telling me they just traded for Nikola Vucevic and drafted Cody Zeller last year, and then they'll have to move one of them to the bench in favor of a veteran who doesn't get them any closer to contending than Parker did? And now Hill is the starting PG, who isn't bad, but not ideal. Just don't get the motive, I guess.

My head almost exploded.

Only current thought is Dallas made out well value-wise, but agree with Jake - not sure about depth at C and how this accomplishes anything for them.

Well, I'd not do that trade if I were the Bucks. They gave up Gasol who's a nice big man to pair With Faried and a 1st for Kyle Anderson & some CAP. Clearly a bad move as Anderson isn't anywhere chose to what Gasol is, and he won't be what Gasol is, because he won't be a force on O and D like Marc.

Also, bad for Dallas, who traded their best player for a C, forcing Hill to start. Also, they gave up Matthews who's a nice player on a good deal. Not wise

Hawks clearly made out as bandits here. They win a lot talent-wise. But I don't think Parker - Matthews - Barnes - Smith - Cousins is enough to win, and they are a lot older now.

I mean, with LeBron Kobe and Dirk reuniting, wrong time to go All- In for the Hawks.

Jake0890 (MIN) wrote:Wow, that's a lot of players moving in one trade...

It's nice that Atlanta got rid of Pek I guess, and they got the 2 best players in the trade imo, but with Tony Parker clearly the starting point guard now, where does Kemba fit in? They've turned a young team with a lot of potential into a (fairly) veteran team where what you see is what you get. Harrison and TRob are all that's left, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them leave either. Not sure of the point because I'm not sure Parker - Kemba - Smith - Barnes/Robinson - DMC gets them any closer to contending than Kemba - Barnes - Anderson - Momroe/Smith - Pek does. A lot of value here, but the revolving door of players continues... not sure if it's worth it.

Kemba, Barnes, Robinson, Cousins is still a pretty young core, hopefully there is still some potential there. As for Kemba, didn't you say you aren't a fan of his? He's getting starter minutes off the bench so I think he'll be ok. Not sure what "what you see is what you get" means, or "Harrison and TRob are all that's left" means. 

Jake0890 (MIN) wrote:Haven't both Cousins and Smith played for the Hawks before?

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like a 2nd attempt at something that didn't work before.

Jake0890 (MIN) wrote:If you continue to make major roster changes throughout the season and shuffle the roster, I don't think you'll get anywhere, and it's just going to be deja vu where you come into the season at the top of the East, it doesn't work out, you rip the team apart to rebuild, and make trades to get back to contention in the offseason. Rinse and repeat.

I only came into the season at the top of the East last year, but that aside you seem concerned about my "revolving door" of players, and while I am touched by that and appreciate your advice it's not like you have taken the Rizzo approach yourself. You've traded everyone outside of Love and had him on the block last season too, no? OP tore apart that Miami team and won two titles, if you want to comment on the merits of of a particular deal (good or bad) that's great. I can learn from constructive criticism, or a joke here and there but almost all of your comments boil down to: 

Jake0890 (MIN) wrote:He wont even finish the year on this team, so its just temporary. 

Sun Scorched (CHA) wrote:My head almost exploded.  

Only current thought is Dallas made out well value-wise, but agree with Jake - not sure about depth at C and how this accomplishes anything for them.

Gasol was a top 5 C in 2012, I think Dallas took the "add talent and worry about fit later." 

Marcos_Beck (OKC) wrote:Well, I'd not do that trade if I were the Bucks. They gave up Gasol who's a nice big man to pair With Faried and a 1st for Kyle Anderson & some CAP. Clearly a bad move as Anderson isn't anywhere chose to what Gasol is, and he won't be what Gasol is, because he won't be a force on O and D like Marc.

Also, bad for Dallas, who traded their best player for a C, forcing Hill to start. Also, they gave up Matthews who's a nice player on a good deal. Not wise

Hawks clearly made out as bandits here. They win a lot talent-wise. But I don't think Parker - Matthews - Barnes - Smith - Cousins is enough to win, and they are a lot older now.

Anderson is 9 years younger then Gasol so it makes sense to pair him with Harrison and Faried I'd think. In terms of talent I think I lost out given how high I am on Anderson but we felt this would push us over the top. As for the starting 5, we are taking a similar approach with the strong bench actually. 

PG: Tony Parker [32]/Kemba Walker [16]/Rodney Stuckey [-]
SG: Wesley Mathews [30]/Kemba Walker [10]/Thabo Sefolosha [8]/Sasha Pavlovic [-]
SF: Harrison Barnes [30]/Thabo Sefolosha [18]/Derrick Brown [-]
PF: Josh Smith [30]/Thomas Robinson [10]/Emeka Okafor [8]
CE: DeMarcus Cousins [30]/Emeka Okafor [18]/Josh Harrellson [-]


Kemba, Thabo and Okafor are playing 26 mpg, there isn't a big drop off once my starters go to the bench.

Marcos_Beck (OKC) wrote:I mean, with LeBron Kobe and Dirk reuniting, wrong time to go All- In for the Hawks.

Meh. Kobe and Dirk are big "names", I'm not sure how much they have left in the tank though. Both are 35 IIRC. Lebron is a a top 2 (at worst) player in the league and that makes IND dangerous but I'm not really worried about anyone else on that roster. Barnes/Thabo will make Lebron work some, while Cousins won't have as much resistance from Haywood and Kaman. Smith is the perfect defender to throw on Dirk, and on the other end he'll have a big advantage as well.. Jack/Jimmer have to stay in front of Parker/Kemba and rebounding/defense/depth should play a role.

OP left the Heat, this is the perfect time to go all-in for us. Hell even without a GM that team scares me.

blackice (ATL) wrote:

Kemba, Barnes, Robinson, Cousins is still a pretty young core, hopefully there is still some potential there. As for Kemba, didn't you say you aren't a fan of his? He's getting starter minutes off the bench so I think he'll be ok. Not sure what "what you see is what you get" means, or "Harrison and TRob are all that's left" means. 

Yep, I'm not a fan of Kemba, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have talent.

As far as the TRob and Harrison comment, I meant that they're the only guys on rookie contracts left from last year.

blackice (ATL) wrote:
I only came into the season at the top of the East last year, but that aside you seem concerned about my "revolving door" of players, and while I am touched by that and appreciate your advice it's not like you have taken the Rizzo approach yourself. You've traded everyone outside of Love and had him on the block last season too, no? OP tore apart that Miami team and won two titles, if you want to comment on the merits of of a particular deal (good or bad) that's great. I can learn from constructive criticism, or a joke here and there but almost all of your comments boil down to: 

Jake0890 (MIN) wrote:He wont even finish the year on this team, so its just temporary. 

Sure, I'm no Rizzo, but there's a difference between joining a team and trading away the guys that don't fit to create a team that you want and trading so much that some players are on there 2nd stints with you already. I've played multiple seasons with you on multiple different leagues now and there's clearly a pattern. It just feels like we've been through this before. You said it yourself that you want to run your team like a "business" (and more power to you), so I think you know yourself that most of the guys on your roster are temporary, and that's okay. The trade deadline will come and go, and you'll be hitting the phone lines hard to try to make that last move to solidify yourself into contention, or if things don't go well, you trade all your guys and start over (and that's how you got Kyle Anderson and co. last year).

Didn't mean to come of preachy or that I know more about your team than you do (in all fairness I haven't done jack shit with my team yet either), so my bad there. I'll lay off.

I understand blackice POV, when you're building a team, you go for talent 1st and fitting with your other players after.

But that's not the way you do when your team is supposed to contend for a ring.
First of all, you did not give your team full of young, great players a chance to show what they could do together. Kemba, Kyle, Barnes, Cousins, that team was already nice and had potential to be much more than what they are now.
Instead, you gave up your golden boy Kyle for Tony Parker, who does not seem to fit well with your team. Parker won't shoot 3s or defend any better than Walker, and, sincerely, that was what your perimeter needed. Someone who can run the point, play off ball, stay on the perimeter, play a 3&D role as a PG, and Kemba fits better in that role. Also, Parker takes away minutes that are important to develop Kemba. Walker-Cousins duo was very nice, but they're still developing, you gotta give them minutes to do so.
Next, you're playing you best players 30MPG while other teams rides their starters for 36MPG. That 6mpg difference is big in production, as starters tend to produce more than reserves.

You did well talent wise. Moving Miller + Thompson + 2nd + Kyle Anderson for Parker + Matthews was nice, as you got more talent overall. But, Market-wise, when you look at trade value, Kyle + CAP + someone is more valuable than Parker + Matthews + someone. When trading for difference makers, teams that give up those kind of players want in return flexibility, picks and young guys who can develop into difference makers, not veterans on big contracts who won't take them further than the players they already have.
I think you lost a bit of what you had to lure a difference maker to your team. Kyle holds more value than Parker or Matthews and is way more appealing when trading, so it be wise to keep him and bring a guy better than Parker after. I'm sure you'd have gone for a better SG like Paul George than Parker + Wes, specially when you have Kemba at the bench and can start him alongside a George-type SG. It was just a matter of waiting.

Don't get me wrong, depth is nice. But giving away quality in your starting 5 in favor of depth when you already have a very balanced starting 5 and have a chance to contend.. That's not a wise move.
A wise move is to go 2 for 1, put a great asset from your bench or even 2 starting players (if you have a player who can start for your team and not lose balance) for 1 difference maker. Like, Kemba + Kyle Andersen for a TOP PG (and you start Sefolosha next to him).
You did well to put together that team. Now it's time to settle down on the players who alone have more quality, and sit back and watch your team win some games.

I've received few great offers for Hibbert. One was actually very close to what I wanted, and in other occasions I'd have pulled the trigger. But I'm in no hurry to trade anyone and want to give those guys a chance to show how much damage they can do. I also have another trade ready for mid-season that brings 2 pieces for my backcourt depth so no need to hurry.
Instead I'm keeping Hibbert. When it's time, when a difference maker PG / SG / SF / PF is available (and I know some time around mid season there will be one available) I can offer a package of Hibbert + a starter, which is way more valuable than that same starter + a bunch of great players who together are better than Hibbert, but earns more and alone holds less value than him.

It's a question of being patient my man. Just wait, let the games be played, keep your best assets, wait till a real TOP player is available, put together your best asset + a starter for him, and hope your team has what it takes to win.

Please do not think about that as a criticism. I do not want to harm or offend you, just sharing my thoughts on that specific subject, trying to explain why I'd do every little thing, it's a 'suggestion', a constructive criticism. You can agree or disagree, thank God I don't hold all the truth in my words. But please don't take it personal. Just trying to help you to see you have a great team and you need to settle down a little bit, sit back and enjoy what you build there

Are there no trade restrictions on players ?? I thought Cousins was already dealt to ATL this offseason.

Higrade (GSW) wrote:Are there no trade restrictions on players ?? I thought Cousins was already dealt to ATL this offseason.

They re-structured the deal so they could include Cousins, Parker, Matthews and others..
I tried to do the same with Hibbert, and I actually was so close to doing so, but in the end no offer brought me what I really wanted.. Still, I had nice offers, very tentative ones hahaha

And I'm still open to dealing Hibbert for the right price.

That was alot of players, has to be a CSL record.

For Dallas they obviously feel Gasol at the deadline will garner them more value in addition to the picks they got from Milwaukee from moving Parker and Matthews and they still remain competitive, not bad considering they're expiring.

Denver going to war with Holiday KCP Ariza Monroe Pekovic not bad for DMC Thompson Miller it's a decent starting five, not quite as dangerous as their team last season though with Dirk DMC frontline but not bad.

Milwaukee gave up alot in Marc Gasol for Kyle Anderson so they must be really high on him but sometimes you do things like that to get who you want and moving forward with Kyle and Kenneth plus the capspace they're opening up obviously could make this much better for them down the line.

Atlanta made this move for one reason to me and I didn't have to read his explanation, they moved Kyle Anderson for Parker Matthews, 2 expiring players who can have a profound affect on winning and that's exactly what they're trying to do, win it all and with a wide open East it's quite possible so why wait since the goal is to win it all? Also it's kinda funny seeing guys talk as if Kemba was traded, he's still on the team so the Kemba DMC duo is still intact. This was a win now move, plain and simple and that's to be commended cause when he had win now guys and moved em for youth, it was an issue with that, now he's done the opposite and it's still something derogatory said. Worse case if guys weren't too far in the forest to see the trees, he's clearly maneuvering for cap flexibilty as well.

Also Kyle was to be moved to Milwaukee once before but the Faried contract made the deal illegal so I look at this like a re-do with Parker and Matthews added in place of Jason Thompson and Andre Miller so how is that a loss?

Pretty decent all around considering the inital moves that were previously pending.

AAAAAaaaaand my brain exploded. Also didn't know we could trade picks so far in the future.

That's an awful trade for Milwaukee. Wow. Two firsts *and* Gasol for Anderson? They're going to regret that move IMO.

Marcos_Beck (OKC) wrote:I understand blackice POV, when you're building a team, you go for talent 1st and fitting with your other players after.

that's not the way you do when your team is supposed to contend for a ring.
First of all, you did not give your team full of young, great players a chance to show what they could do together. Kemba, Kyle, Barnes, Cousins, that team was already nice and had potential to be much more than what they are now.
Instead, you gave up your golden boy Kyle for Tony Parker, who does not seem to fit well with your team. Parker won't shoot 3s or defend any better than Walker, and, sincerely, that was what your perimeter needed. Someone who can run the point, play off ball, stay on the perimeter, play a 3&D role as a PG, and Kemba fits better in that role. Also, Parker takes away minutes that are important to develop Kemba. Walker-Cousins duo was very nice, but they're still developing, you gotta give them minutes to do so.
Next, you're playing you best players 30MPG while other teams rides their starters for 36MPG. That 6mpg difference is big in production, as starters tend to produce more than reserves.

You did well talent wise. Moving Miller + Thompson + 2nd + Kyle Anderson for Parker + Matthews was nice, as you got more talent overall. But, Market-wise, when you look at trade value, Kyle + CAP + someone is more valuable than Parker + Matthews + someone. When trading for difference makers, teams that give up those kind of players want in return flexibility, picks and young guys who can develop into difference makers, not veterans on big contracts who won't take them further than the players they already have.
I think you lost a bit of what you had to lure a difference maker to your team. Kyle holds more value than Parker or Matthews and is way more appealing when trading, so it be wise to keep him and bring a guy better than Parker after. I'm sure you'd have gone for a better SG like Paul George than Parker + Wes, specially when you have Kemba at the bench and can start him alongside a George-type SG. It was just a matter of waiting.

Don't get me wrong, depth is nice. But giving away quality in your starting 5 in favor of depth when you already have a very balanced starting 5 and have a chance to contend.. That's not a wise move.
A wise move is to go 2 for 1, put a great asset from your bench or even 2 starting players (if you have a player who can start for your team and not lose balance) for 1 difference maker. Like, Kemba + Kyle Andersen for a TOP PG (and you start Sefolosha next to him).
You did well to put together that team. Now it's time to settle down on the players who alone have more quality, and sit back and watch your team win some games.

I've received few great offers for Hibbert. One was actually very close to what I wanted, and in other occasions I'd have pulled the trigger. But I'm in no hurry to trade anyone and want to give those guys a chance to show how much damage they can do. I also have another trade ready for mid-season that brings 2 pieces for my backcourt depth so no need to hurry.
Instead I'm keeping Hibbert. When it's time, when a difference maker PG / SG / SF / PF is available (and I know some time around mid season there will be one available) I can offer a package of Hibbert + a starter, which is way more valuable than that same starter + a bunch of great players who together are better than Hibbert, but earns more and alone holds less value than him.

It's a question of being patient my man. Just wait, let the games be played, keep your best assets, wait till a real TOP player is available, put together your best asset + a starter for him, and hope your team has what it takes to win.

Please do not think about that as a criticism. I do not want to harm or offend you, just sharing my thoughts on that specific subject, trying to explain why I'd do every little thing, it's a 'suggestion', a constructive criticism. You can agree or disagree, thank God I don't hold all the truth in my words. But please don't take it personal. Just trying to help you to see you have a great team and you need to settle down a little bit, sit back and enjoy what you build there

I underlined the points I found contradictory, I'm not sure whether you're saying hold out for maximum value or put a bigger emphasis on fit. You made both cases. As for Parker, why do I need a 3&D PG? I don't have a dominant playmaking wing like Lebron, or multiple playmakers all over the place. Parker was 21/4/9 on 46 FG% as the 1st option in Dallas and his skillset compliments the rest of the team I'd think. Kemba, Thabo, Mathews are very good defenders and have range while Barnes is an elite shooter that can create some as well. Why do I need more 3 point shooters and defense? Parker can wreck havoc in the paint, play drive and kick basketball and averaged more assists then Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Jrue Holiday and Stephen Curry (only Jose Calderon averaged more) so there are no questions about his ability to run an elite offense (which was the main criticism about Kemba). Also Kemba is still getting starter minutes and should thrive against 2nd units.

As for the red points, you traded the best (or 2nd best to Durant) player in the league for 2 lesser players. Hibbert is your backup center and the drop-off from Lebron James to Paul George is fairly massive. Holding on to Hibbert to flip him is fine, but "A wise move is to go 2 for 1, put a great asset from your bench or even 2 starting players (if you have a player who can start for your team and not lose balance) for 1 difference maker" is exactly what IND did in your deal with him.

I'm not easily offended, the more conversation that is sparked the better it is for the league!