- 1,545
- 505
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2014
Didn't know Simmons was taller than randle...what do we do with him if we get ben?
|| LocK Dis Up ||
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by licensed to ball,
- Start date
- Status
MVP
Supporter
- 81,824
- 82,748
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
Move him to the bench or try and package him to get another player.
- 36,246
- 11,064
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Trade Nance and make Simmons and Randle work. Whether you split the 4 minutes down the line at 24 each. Give Ben 6 minutes at the 3 and Randle 6 minutes at the 5.
Because trading Randle is going to give you a **** return. As would trading Clarkson or Russell. When you get to that point, you're wasting significant assets and the type of stupid moves that keep teams permanently in the lottery.
Still would go Ingram # 1 though.
Because trading Randle is going to give you a **** return. As would trading Clarkson or Russell. When you get to that point, you're wasting significant assets and the type of stupid moves that keep teams permanently in the lottery.
Still would go Ingram # 1 though.
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- 81,824
- 82,748
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
If trading Randle is going to give you a **** return, what the hell you going to get for Nance?
- 36,246
- 11,064
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Not looking for a good return. Isn't even about return. It's necessity of shifting your focus. But I can live with a **** return for a 27th pick. Can't for a 7th pick.
Also your hand is forced to trade Nance at that point. Couldn't make playing time even if you wanted to.
Last edited:
- 3,212
- 1,372
- Joined
- May 8, 2013
Scouts are now leaning towards Ingram as the best prospect available due to the fact the Ben doesn't have that inner drive in himself....
MVP
Supporter
- 81,824
- 82,748
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
Or you could trade Randle who's the more talented guy but also someone what needs the ball when you're theoretically adding another young guy who also needs the ball to be effective in Simmons. Nance on the other hand can be that Rick Fox guy like CP has suggested before just a utility guy that doesn't have to have plays run to be effective. In his stint before the injury when he was in the starting lineup he was averaging close to a dbl-dbl as well. For someone that talks about fit all the time interesting that you take this stance.
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- 81,824
- 82,748
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
John Ireland give you this inside info? Cause as usual is wrong.
I'm kinda leaning that same way, IF Ben is the guy, I think I move Randle because he has a larger contract early on, and Nance adds so many things off the bench that fit better than what Randle would add.
Now, Randle COULD change his game off the bench I suppose, and I wouldn't just give him away, but if we could get a decent return for him, a decent 22-23-24 year old young SF, or even a late 20's legit 7 foot Center, I would consider it.
But depends on how the pieces drop. Perfect world we just get Ingram and add #32 to the mix and sort it all out in FA with lots of cap. If it's Ben, then we're gonna have to dig in a lil deeper.
comptonprince
Banned
- 8,744
- 2,221
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2014
Randle for Alex Len?
- 3,212
- 1,372
- Joined
- May 8, 2013
Bleacher Report
That's not bad at all, but I doubt highly that the Suns would do it. I highly doubt it. But that's not a terrible thought on our end.
MVP
Supporter
- 81,824
- 82,748
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
- 7,560
- 596
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
well JuJu's jumper may be a little better right now, coming out of UK it wasn't that much better
MVP
Supporter
- 81,824
- 82,748
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
Since they apparently want to go back to 3 scoring PGs again send them Clarkson and Randle for Booker and Len
Since they apparently want to go back to 3 scoring PGs again send them Clarkson and Randle for Booker and Len
You know Booker is untouchable at this point.
MVP
Supporter
- 81,824
- 82,748
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
You know Booker is untouchable at this point.
Let me dream. They did give up on IT2 pretty early though
- 36,246
- 11,064
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Last edited:
- 7,560
- 596
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
Lets talk Dragan Bender.... just in case
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- 81,824
- 82,748
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
Read that article on Monday, I'd expect more from Wojo's peeps, but every other reputable mock draft has Ben at #1. And he said scouts anyway as in team officials not journalists.
- 36,246
- 11,064
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
As for the fit comment. It's talent + fit.
Now if the 2 players are just or nearly as talented as the other, you go fit
If one player is by far the better player by a large margin, then you go talent.
It's why Russell over Okafor. And Ingram over Simmons.
But why Nance should never be considered over Randle. Especially when you factor in the asset used to obtain the player.
Now if you get the godfather offer for Randle fine. But I wouldn't bet on that. Almost all these rookie contract guys except for a select few are like cars in early years. Mass depreciation in return. It only starts to increase when they start to make a name. Or if they blow the doors off.
Now if the 2 players are just or nearly as talented as the other, you go fit
If one player is by far the better player by a large margin, then you go talent.
It's why Russell over Okafor. And Ingram over Simmons.
But why Nance should never be considered over Randle. Especially when you factor in the asset used to obtain the player.
Now if you get the godfather offer for Randle fine. But I wouldn't bet on that. Almost all these rookie contract guys except for a select few are like cars in early years. Mass depreciation in return. It only starts to increase when they start to make a name. Or if they blow the doors off.
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- 81,824
- 82,748
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2008
You don't think the gap between Simmons and the field is wide? I think it's a similar situation between like AD was from the rest of the field or even KAT last year. Now Is be fine with Ingram because he does slot in fine but no way am I taking him at #1 and if Mitch does he should be fired right after.
There's no godfather deal needed for Randle either, Hiatt a serviceable wing who can play defense and occasionally hit a 3.
There's no godfather deal needed for Randle either, Hiatt a serviceable wing who can play defense and occasionally hit a 3.
Last edited:
- 23,933
- 5,933
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2005
Makes no sense to try and trade Nance.
There is absolutely no fair value for a guy like Nance, why lose him for some crappy DLeague talent?
Always bench space for an athletic, high motor rebounding forward off the bench who has shown consistent growth with shooting as well.
I don't care if we got Simmons Randle and Bosh, nance is always useful on a 12 man roster especially at such a low cost.
Can't imagine how much better he can still be once we get a competent coach who can help him with more development.
There is absolutely no fair value for a guy like Nance, why lose him for some crappy DLeague talent?
Always bench space for an athletic, high motor rebounding forward off the bench who has shown consistent growth with shooting as well.
I don't care if we got Simmons Randle and Bosh, nance is always useful on a 12 man roster especially at such a low cost.
Can't imagine how much better he can still be once we get a competent coach who can help him with more development.
- Status