grizzknob

There are a good number of advanced stats that indicate that they really are not very close at all.

I'm trying to figure out what you're referring to with Portland, did they trade future 1st rounders for an established player at some point? McCollum was drafted by Portland. So was Zach Collins. Nurkic they traded for but they also received a 1st round pick in that deal (for Mason Plumlee and a 2nd, wow they won that trade). I'm honestly not sure where the Portland comparison is coming from. And I'm not against including assets to get the player(s) you want around Ja and JJJ. I just think the GS pick could be a significant asset and would want to be compensated accordingly if we consider moving it. The Utah pick I don't value quite as much personally. The flip side to stockpiling is not valuing future picks enough and it can lead to things like, I don't know, including a future first in a shortsighted deal for Jeff Green I view Zach Lavine as an interesting idea but also pretty risky and am hesitant to just through all or most our current assets in a deal for him. I personally value Bradley Beal, for example, a decent bit more than Lavine and if Beal was somehow on the table I'd be a bit more willing to part with future assets to try and land him.

Holding one to one particular assert that you think could be worth something in a few years does not mean you are just punting and not trying to win until then. It could also just mean that you are being smart, competent, and not short sided.

In 2024 Steph will be 36 and Klay and Draymond will be 34. Probably not still title contenders at that point and often aging cores get dismantled before all the Pieces are in their mid 30s. I think that GS pick might end up being pretty sweet, and would rather hold on to it. Utah, not so much, of the 2 it’s the one I would be more willing to part with.

Oh, thanks for that clarification. Still wouldn’t support including our 2021 1st for either player, I think that would be a mistake, even though I like the idea and potential fit of Hield otherwise.

I think Hield is someone we could and possibly should go after, and would be open to Lavine if he’s available for something reasonable. But I would not support trading our 2021 1st rounder for either player (also I don’t think we even could do that). To be clear, a significant part of the reason I’m interested in Hield is because I think he may be available without having to give up an asset like Clarke or a quality 1st round pick.

Yeah, I think they were primarily interested in Winslow, who they saw/see as a piece that has a chance to be a long term good fit in this team, and we’re willing to make a move with long term in mind even if that disrupted things a bit for this season, especially since they didn’t see any of the outgoing pieces as ones to keep around long term Whether that was the right call on Winslow still remains to be seen but I believe that was their mindset. I think the FO would probably still prefer to convey the pick this year in a weaker draft as opposed to having even lighter protection on it in a strong draft next year. Tanking for a top 4 pick at the trade deadline doesn’t make much sense given our record and position in the standings at the time

I mean, Minny also has to include a lightly protected first round pick in a strong draft in the Wiggins deal. Still not sure if GS got enough to take on Wiggins, but that pick could end up being a very significant asset, and the Wiggins deal doesn’t get traded without it.

I’m not against the concept of a reclamation project, I just think that Knox is about the worst possible option for one. His real plus minus was next to last in the league among all players last season, and somehow got worse and is last in the entire league by a significant margin this season. He’s 3rd from last in the league in 538’s player rater among players who played 950 minutes this season. (No. Dillon isn’t close to worst in the league in either metric). There is a difference between below average but with the potential to be useful with some reasonable improvements, and a complete dumpster fire on the court, and Knox is the latter, imo.

I don’t see this FO having any interest in Knox personally. They’ve shown a preference for people with good or decemy advanced stats, and Knox has some of the worst advanced stats in the history of the league. This may be an exaggeration, but only slightly.

I'm thrilled that the Clippers 2nd/3rd team somehow outplayed the Lillard / Blazers starters in crunch time today even when Portland needed/wanted it way more.

Agreed. It doesn’t have to be this offseason but we’ll likely want To try to.make whatever major move(s) before we have Ja and JJJ on their undoubtably pricey 2nd deals. It’s not impossible after that but it definitely becomes harder.

If it’s me, Clarke is off the table in any scenario. I’d want to see if they hopefully are primarily interested in saving money since they seem to prefer Bogdanovic and paying a 6th man what they are paying Hield is a lot. If Dylan plus a shorter contract like Dieng can get it done I’m all for it, and maybe throw in a 2nd or something. Other pieces besides Ja, JJJ, Clarke and probably JV (who doesn’t make sense to include for either side) would be potentially negotiable.

There are other factors that might cause the FO to seriously consider Hield, if he is available for something reasonable, imo. This FO has shown an early ability to target players who can contribute and who may be undervalued by the league, like Clarke, Melton, Tyus and even Konchar. I think they are using advanced stats and analytics pretty heavily to assist them and it’s working. However one thing the league definitely fully values these days is quality perimeter shooting, so it’s maybe not so surprising that the FO’s approach to finding undervalued young contributors has resulted in a team that is currently below average in quality 3 point shooting, since everyone values shooting while maybe not everyone has the foresight to value the potential contributions of a Clarke or a Melton ahead of time. I’m sure the FO is aware of our need for more quality shooting and would very much like to address it, it’s just probably going to be harder to find value in the form of elite perimeter shooting, as we are already seeing. You might just have to pay up for that skill and find your bargains elsewhere. The opportunities to add elite shooting to the team at a reasonable price might be not come all that often. Waiting to see what you can get in the draft is a viable path but is also risky, as the entire league is valuing shooting in the draft too. Back to Heild specifically, it’s not like he doesn’t have any flaws, however what he is, is one of the best and highest volume perimeter shooters in the league. If you narrow it down to just wing players, who are, say, under 30, and who are actually potentially available... how likely is it that you find a better option later? I’m not saying that trading for him wouldn’t be a risk, it definitely would be But passing on the opportunity could also be pretty risky. These are the tough decisions that a good FO is always having to work through.

Lavine is an interesting gamble to take too. I don't hate the idea. It just seems like Hield may be more readily available of the 2.