Everything Trade Chatter

[magoon]

I agree that Aaron Gordon is the only player who makes sense for a potential trade, both because he might be available and because he fits our overall game plan. There really isn't anybody else who might both be available and that Masai might want (with the possible exception of Willie Cauley-Stein, but WCS has so many downsides to his game I'm not sure Masai would be interested).

A trade that makes sense for both sides is:

Toronto -> Gordon
Orlando -> Delon Wright, Bebe Nogueira, Toronto's 2017 first-rounder, LA Clippers' 2017 first-rounder

Yes, the 2017 draft is loaded with talent, but the simple truth is that right now the Raptors' development level is stuffed full. Assuming Orlando goes into a full rebuild - which is getting more likely at every point - you can expect them to shop Vucevic and Ibaka (and Jeff Green if they can get anybody to bite) for youth and draft picks, so they'll need promising bigs to play behind Bismack, and I fully believe one of the reasons Bebe is getting more playtime than Poeltl right now is because Masai wants to showcase him for a potential trade. In terms of point guards, this is a team that has Elfrid Payton, DJ Augustin and CJ Watson at point, and Delon's already a better player than Watson and Augustin and probably ends up being better than Payton, who cannot shoot worth a damn. (Delon is also a very Frank Vogel type of PG.)

It's a high price to pay, but Gordon won't be cheap, and the upside justifies the cost.

[DanH]

I don't know about Gordon. Is there really that much upside there? He can't shoot at all, really, outside of 3 feet. He's a decent rebounder. He's not exactly great from the line, which doesn't project well for a developing jumper. He's solid defensively, though undersized.

But I think I'd save our assets for a bigger target.

[S.R.]

I don't know about Gordon. Is there really that much upside there? He can't shoot at all, really, outside of 3 feet. He's a decent rebounder. He's not exactly great from the line, which doesn't project well for a developing jumper. He's solid defensively, though undersized.

But I think I'd save our assets for a bigger target.

If this team is going to upgrade the PF, they have to get a guy with range, at least a reliable 15 footer if not a 3 pt shot. It would be very hard to play DD, JV, + PF who can't shoot as a starting 5.

[magoon]

If this team is going to upgrade the PF, they have to get a guy with range, at least a reliable 15 footer if not a 3 pt shot. It would be very hard to play DD, JV, + PF who can't shoot as a starting 5.

Here's the thing. None of those guys, the guys who can be traditional PFs but also have range, are available. None of them. They are immensely valuable. The biggest trade chip we have isn't Ross or even JV - it's 2Pat, who's undersized but does all the things a modern starting PF is expected to do, he's just not quite a starter.

So if you want this sort of PF, you either go with a prospect who's not there yet in some respects (like Gordon, who can't shoot) or you stick with Patterson and Siakam and hope Siakam becomes the guy. There really aren't any other options. The stars like Millsap and Love are locked up and not going anywhere. The second tier guys like Marvin Williams and Channing Frye and Tobias Harris are locked up and not available either. Ibaka is probably going to be available but he's a rental and Masai doesn't do rentals.

[Lupe]

If this team is going to upgrade the PF, they have to get a guy with range, at least a reliable 15 footer if not a 3 pt shot. It would be very hard to play DD, JV, + PF who can't shoot as a starting 5.

We're starting Siakam at the 4, we are literally doing that right now.

I don't know about Gordon. Is there really that much upside there? He can't shoot at all, really, outside of 3 feet. He's a decent rebounder. He's not exactly great from the line, which doesn't project well for a developing jumper. He's solid defensively, though undersized.

But I think I'd save our assets for a bigger target.

He's 21. You're not buying a finished project, you're trying to buy low on a guy with excellent potential to raise the ceiling of the team long-term. I agree someone like Millsap or Aldridge would be better, but the chance of those guys being available is not particularly high --- you pointed out that Atlanta has struggled of late but they're still going to comfortably be a playoff team and I don't think you invest that kind of money in Dwight to kick off a rebuild.

He has excellent potential on the defensive end, has good passing ability for a bigman and his biggest weakness - shooting - can be worked on and improved. Additionally I think he'll be excellent in the pick and roll with our guards and he strikes me as someone who will play much better on a stronger team. Orlando are legitimately playing him out of position right now (he's playing almost no minutes at power forward) with a very poorly balanced roster.

Last year he showed a lot of growth. .139 WS/48 and a +9 net rating on a team that had a negative one at just 20. That's been stalled this year due to how he's being used. On our team he'd be in the right position playing with better players for a team that has a track record of doing a great job developing young players with Ross, DeRozan and JV all significantly improving from when they got drafted to now.

[jimmie]

I don't know about Gordon. Is there really that much upside there? He can't shoot at all, really, outside of 3 feet. He's a decent rebounder. He's not exactly great from the line, which doesn't project well for a developing jumper. He's solid defensively, though undersized.

But I think I'd save our assets for a bigger target.

He can shoot outside 3 feet, most definitely. He's 6-8, 230 and highly athletic - nothing wrong with that at the 4, and if he can develop some 3 skills, well... And he'll get bigger; look at the frame, and he's still young.

His numbers are not good right now, but he is a vastly improved shooter since his rookie year. Up until a few weeks ago, he was up around 35% from 3, I think, and has flashed a really solid mid-range game, too. Don't underestimate work ethic and upside, both of which he has in spades. Right price, I think Gordon would be great for this team.

[DanH]

He can shoot outside 3 feet, most definitely. He's 6-8, 230 and highly athletic - nothing wrong with that at the 4, and if he can develop some 3 skills, well... And he'll get bigger; look at the frame, and he's still young.

His numbers are not good right now, but he is a vastly improved shooter since his rookie year. Up until a few weeks ago, he was up around 35% from 3, I think, and has flashed a really solid mid-range game, too. Don't underestimate work ethic and upside, both of which he has in spades. Right price, I think Gordon would be great for this team.

He was up around 35% from three after 6 games. He's hit 7 of 32 since then. But I'm not judging him on this year, because ORL is hilarious, I'm judging him on his career thus far. He's never in his career shot above 34% from any range outside of 10 feet, nor above 42% from in the paint and outside the restricted area (and hasn't even approached that number since his rookie year).

I agree that for the right price, I'd take a shot on Gordon. The price above was 4 prospect/pick pieces. That's the sort of package you trade for improving now - if the goal is to get better 3 or 4 years from now, why trade a bunch of prospects/picks?

[DanH]

He's 21. You're not buying a finished project, you're trying to buy low on a guy with excellent potential to raise the ceiling of the team long-term. I agree someone like Millsap or Aldridge would be better, but the chance of those guys being available is not particularly high --- you pointed out that Atlanta has struggled of late but they're still going to comfortably be a playoff team and I don't think you invest that kind of money in Dwight to kick off a rebuild.

He has excellent potential on the defensive end, has good passing ability for a bigman and his biggest weakness - shooting - can be worked on and improved. Additionally I think he'll be excellent in the pick and roll with our guards and he strikes me as someone who will play much better on a stronger team. Orlando are legitimately playing him out of position right now (he's playing almost no minutes at power forward) with a very poorly balanced roster.

Last year he showed a lot of growth. .139 WS/48 and a +9 net rating on a team that had a negative one at just 20. That's been stalled this year due to how he's being used. On our team he'd be in the right position playing with better players for a team that has a track record of doing a great job developing young players with Ross, DeRozan and JV all significantly improving from when they got drafted to now.

That all sounds great and none of it makes him seem like he'll ever be a better fit for this team than Patterson already is, unless improves his shooting the way you expect, which he's shown no sign of actually doing thus far in his career.

I like Gordon in isolation, and wouldn't mind a buy low. I don't think your offer was a low price, though.

[Lupe]

He was up around 35% from three after 6 games. He's hit 7 of 32 since then. But I'm not judging him on this year, because ORL is hilarious, I'm judging him on his career thus far. He's never in his career shot above 34% from any range outside of 10 feet, nor above 42% from in the paint and outside the restricted area (and hasn't even approached that number since his rookie year).

I agree that for the right price, I'd take a shot on Gordon. The price above was 4 prospect/pick pieces. That's the sort of package you trade for improving now - if the goal is to get better 3 or 4 years from now, why trade a bunch of prospects/picks?

Wait so you wouldn't trade two very late 1sts and Bebe+Wright (who will never see the floor as long as Lowry/CoJo are here) for Gordon (assuming you're talking about magoon's proposal here)? That seems like a very cheap price to get him for, don't even think Orlando would be interested in that.

These aren't high-value assets. They're all pretty low value and very replaceable. You're not getting someone with AG's potential in the late 1st round unless you get very lucky and Bebe's minutes could easily be replaced by Poeltl/Gordon/Sullinger while Wright isn't needed with Lowry/CoJo/VV. I'd do that in a heartbeat if Orlando was willing to.

[Lupe]

That all sounds great and none of it makes him seem like he'll ever be a better fit for this team than Patterson already is, unless improves his shooting the way you expect, which he's shown no sign of actually doing thus far in his career.

I like Gordon in isolation, and wouldn't mind a buy low. I don't think your offer was a low price, though.

I didn't propose an actual offer just suggested they might be interested in a Ross deal.

[magoon]

I agree that for the right price, I'd take a shot on Gordon. The price above was 4 prospect/pick pieces. That's the sort of package you trade for improving now - if the goal is to get better 3 or 4 years from now, why trade a bunch of prospects/picks?

A few points.

1. The Raptors' shooting coaches are pretty good - maybe not Golden State level good, but they turned Norman Powell from a wing with no shot worth mentioning into a genuine three-point threat in less than a year. I would argue there's a reasonable chance they can get Gordon to, say, 35% on midrange shots before the end of the year.

2. Everything I was willing to offer for Gordon is basically expendable. We don't need Bebe; center is incredibly deep around the league and Poeltl is ready to take backup center minutes if we can't find someone to take those 10-15 minutes per game. We don't need Delon - we have two point guards who are definitely better than him and a third who looks extremely promising. We don't need the 2017 late-first-round picks because as stocked as 2017 is, the end of the first round looks to be guys who end up being solid NBA rotation players, and because our roster is already really, really young.

If you think both picks is too expensive, I can see the argument for one pick instead. But it's not an onerous price to pay for someone whose ceiling is future All-Star and who already does most of what we need a power forward to do - pass, defend, rebound and protect the rim.

[DanH]

Wait so you wouldn't trade two very late 1sts and Bebe+Wright (who will never see the floor as long as Lowry/CoJo are here) for Gordon (assuming you're talking about magoon's proposal here)? That seems like a very cheap price to get him for, don't even think Orlando would be interested in that.

These aren't high-value assets. They're all pretty low value and very replaceable. You're not getting someone with AG's potential in the late 1st round unless you get very lucky and Bebe's minutes could easily be replaced by Poeltl/Gordon/Sullinger while Wright isn't needed with Lowry/CoJo/VV. I'd do that in a heartbeat if Orlando was willing to.

Ehh, I could be talked into it, but it means shedding assets such that not enough are left for a big trade - meaning you've basically accepted the ceiling of this team as what it is, and are essentially bailing on trying to go all in now and planning instead for several years down the road.

I'm not completely opposed to the idea, I'm just not remotely excited about it.

[Mess]

That's chandler bing..and he's never proven he can he quality without joey in the lineup

Look closer at the pic Golden posted.

[Lupe]

Ehh, I could be talked into it, but it means shedding assets such that not enough are left for a big trade - meaning you've basically accepted the ceiling of this team as what it is, and are essentially bailing on trying to go all in now and planning instead for several years down the road.

I'm not completely opposed to the idea, I'm just not remotely excited about it.

How is trading for Gordon accepting the ceiling of the team? It's trying to raise it.

Those assets that were suggested for the trade by magoon aren't going to be major difference makers in a trade for an actual star player.

And if Gordon pans out at all (like literally if he only becomes a slightly better version of what he was last year) he's a better trade asset as part of a deal for a star than any of those pieces even combined. Late picks and average prospects don't move the needle in those type of deals.

[DanH]

How is trading for Gordon accepting the ceiling of the team? It's trying to raise it.

Those assets that were suggested for the trade by magoon aren't going to be major difference makers in a trade for an actual star player.

And if Gordon pans out at all (like literally if he only becomes a slightly better version of what he was last year) he's a better trade asset as part of a deal for a star than any of those pieces even combined. Late picks and average prospects don't move the needle in those type of deals.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts...

We have no idea if he'd be a better version of what he was last year. Or if he'd have much trade value at all in a trade shortly after being traded for - teams start to imagine red flags with that sort of turnaround.

Gordon's poor fit with the team's stars means his addition would not change the team's ceiling much at all, unless you are talking long term, in which case we are talking post-Lowry (or declining Lowry) anyway, when the team's current ceiling will be irrelevant, as they will be a superstar short of where they are now.

I'm fine with making a move like that - praying for sudden improvement from a guy who looks like a solid contributor anyway to make him a good fit is fine, if you are not making the move with the purpose of winning now. Let's just be realistic about who we'd be trading for - this is a guy with one good year in the league, and even in that year he was useless offensively except right at the rim.