- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Pels want to move to top of draft, BI to be “aggressively” shopped per Stein
Posted on 5/13/24 at 9:57 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 5/13/24 at 9:57 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Not as a ceiling, no. The ceiling for the top 5 picks in this draft is absolutely not "role player"
They're only "Safer" is because they're already guaranteed to be what this majority of draft projects to be as a ceiling.
quote:But it's more than what you claimed
That "potential upside" is the problem in this draft.
quote:It should be philosophy for small market teams, for sure.
That's NFL draft philosophy more than NBA draft philosophy.
quote:Again, you're incorrectly thinking no top 5 pick in this draft can be any better than just a role player. That's not going to happen. Your starting point is incorrect and thus each take based off of it doesn't work.
You don't accumulate picks when you know the draft is weak and then pray
1
Posted on 5/13/24 at 9:57 am to nicholastiger
quote:
no one is giving up a lottery pick for Ingram
In a quality draft that featured Zion and Ja at the top, David Griffin couldn't get the Pacers to give up Myles Turner for the #4 pick.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 9:58 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:So a potential trade would be the pick for Sheppard AND another solid player, that's not a bad thing.
Sheppard would be great to add to the team, but he's a tertiary guy on offense and we'd be trading a primary guy. Not an even trade. We need a guy who can get his own shot off and that's not Sheppard.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:01 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Not this past season...
Things get real ugly, real fast when Zion is off the court.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:03 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:You've said trading BI for a draft pick framework trade would be a rebuild. By any definition of "rebuild" in sports, it would NOT fit that definition in any way, shape or form.
I'm not the one engaging in this conversation dishonestly.
You've also said the ceiling for all top 5 picks in this draft is vet role player.
If you're being honest and logical, you would concede those are 2 dishonest statements. It's your call if you want to be honest or keep stating those 2 dishonest statements are true.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:06 am to Pels_Yaz
quote:
No we been arguing about his style of play and fit for a couple seasons now.
Yes, with Zion. Without Zion it helped us out a lot (the playoffs had injured BI and questionable officiating so the issues were amplified).
I wish BI had accepted his role as #2, but he didn't. I think he has some feeling of ownership due to being the golden boy here for so long.
Again, with all of the issues and inefficiencies with his style of play, he's still rare in terms of output. There are simply not that many guys who can do 25/5/5 with his shooting numbers. Fewer yet who can playmake.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:07 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:So we can get a top 5 pick and a "LOT more..."
He's just with a LOT more than #5 in this draft
This trade framework sounds even better then!
This post was edited on 5/13/24 at 10:08 am
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:08 am to shel311
quote:
The ceiling for the top 5 picks in this draft is absolutely not "role player"
Other than the 2 French guys...eh...4th/5th starter is looking likely as a ceiling. And the 2 French guys are complete projects.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:09 am to shel311
quote:
So a potential trade would be the pick for Sheppard AND another solid player,
That is a different trade than what's being discussed.
If the pick is a throw in, then why are we discussing it as a focus?
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:09 am to shel311
quote:
Not this past season...
Because we had BI
In that hypothetical, we won't.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:11 am to shel311
quote:
You've said trading BI for a draft pick framework trade would be a rebuild. By any definition of "rebuild" in sports, it would NOT fit that definition in any way, shape or form.
Giving up a top 40-50 guy for a draft pick that isn't likely to contribute in any meaningful way for 3 years, against our timeline, is a rebuild move.
quote:
You've also said the ceiling for all top 5 picks in this draft is vet role player.
No the 2 French guys have more potential, but that's a hardcore rebuild move.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:11 am to shel311
I think he has a point if it was Ingram for just a lottery pick. But there's no scenario where you trade Ingram for only a lottery pick unless you are rebuilding. While yes we were a play-in team, I dont think we are THAT far away to where we need to blow it up but I'm also not delusional to think we are only a player or two to get us over the hump
Nearly every trade scenario I have seen with us getting a top 5 pick, also has us ending up with a really good player too. I still dont think we go that route. I just think they're open to getting the best possible return for Ingram, whether that's inlcuding Nance and Dyson in order to get solutions at PG AND Center or just giving up Ingram and picks for a solution at one. I've seen trades where we include all of that in order to get Murray+Okongwu and I'd be down for that but idk if Griff is spicy enough to make a huge trade like that.
My guess is that we trade Ingram and some change for Allen and we keep CJ at PG for another year and make trade him + Dyson + Nance + a boatload of picks for a PG the following season.
Nearly every trade scenario I have seen with us getting a top 5 pick, also has us ending up with a really good player too. I still dont think we go that route. I just think they're open to getting the best possible return for Ingram, whether that's inlcuding Nance and Dyson in order to get solutions at PG AND Center or just giving up Ingram and picks for a solution at one. I've seen trades where we include all of that in order to get Murray+Okongwu and I'd be down for that but idk if Griff is spicy enough to make a huge trade like that.
My guess is that we trade Ingram and some change for Allen and we keep CJ at PG for another year and make trade him + Dyson + Nance + a boatload of picks for a PG the following season.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:11 am to shel311
quote:
This trade framework sounds even better then!
Sure, but it's completely changing the frame of the discussion.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:14 am to SlowFlowPro
It is, but I think most would agree that a pick plus an above average player is the more likely trade than just a pick for BI.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:16 am to WicKed WayZ
quote:
. I've seen trades where we include all of that in order to get Murray+Okongwu and I'd be down for that but idk if Griff is spicy enough to make a huge trade like that.
That seems to be the fan theory.
That would not be a pick-focused trade, though. Unlikely to get the #1 pick in that deal.
quote:
My guess is that we trade Ingram and some change for Allen and we keep CJ at PG for another year and make trade him + Dyson + Nance + a boatload of picks for a PG the following season.
I hope Jimmy Butler wants out of Miami and they ponder a full implosion-rebuild and we could get Bam. Or making that trade with more picks and Mobley instead of Allen.
I think our big man situation (esp with JV likely gone) is extremely dire.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:16 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Not factually, nope.
Giving up a top 40-50 guy for a draft pick that isn't likely to contribute in any meaningful way for 3 years, against our timeline, is a rebuild move.
This team does not become a sub 30 win team vying for a top 5 pick if we trade BI just for a draft pick.
We're still playing for a top 6-8 seed next season without BI, which if we're being honest, no one in the world would ever call that a rebuild unless they had a agenda to fit that narrative into.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:20 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That seems to be the fan theory.
Getting Murray/Okongwu back was a widely reported deal that we kicked around last year before the deadline. Teams often go back to areas they've explored before. I see no reason to assume this one is no longer something being considered.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:20 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I think our big man situation (esp with JV likely gone) is extremely dire.
I think it's dire for the organization too, which makes me believe they're going to go hard for Allen for BI and some change to try and get that unique center for Zion and then go for a PG later.
The PERFECT scenario is Garland and Allen
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:20 am to shel311
quote:
Not factually, nope.
This team does not become a sub 30 win team vying for a top 5 pick if we trade BI just for a draft pick.
We're still playing for a top 6-8 seed next season without BI, which if we're being honest, no one in the world would ever call that a rebuild unless they had a agenda to fit that narrative into.
Some definition results for "rebuild sports definition"
quote:
In sports, a rebuild is when a team sacrifices short-term results in favor of a more successful future
quote:
A rebuilding year happens when a key player(s) or coach leaves an origination
quote:
"Rebuilding" a team means taking a group of veteran, but (mostly) mediocre players, and trading them for younger, unproven players, in the hope that the younger players will collectively "grow" into something better than what you started out with.
Posted on 5/13/24 at 10:21 am to TigerinATL
quote:
Getting Murray/Okongwu back was a widely reported deal that we kicked around last year before the deadline. T
If there was a time to get Murray, it was at the deadline. His value was total shite then
That's why Trae is on the market now.
Page 9 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News