Now, I can't stand on this forum when people do three team trades, and I can't figure out what there talking about, and where they’re going with their idea.
This is a three team trade involving Sac, Tor, and Indiana. The original idea was to trade Danny Granger for Tyreke Evans.
I see Granger as more of a solid fit at Small Forward.
Evans though he has been cast as a PG should practice his shot and be off the ball at SG.
But since the entire problem with Mr. Cousins, I included Tdot in the trade to make the money work, and to give every team a fair deal. Here is what bugs me about ESPN trade machine, if anyone on here has done it, you make a trade that you think will benefit both teams then it comes back, and says one team will 5 more games, and the other one will lose 28 more games. What the crap is up with that? For this trade which I will post in a second it says Toronto will lose 5 more games. With Cousins and T.Rob in the line-up. I don't care if Cousins starts throwing popcorn into the crowd, he will be improving every game, and Thomas Robinson will at least be a great 6th man if not a starter caliber player in the league one day that could at least get you 10, and 5. So what gives? Next the "trade disaster" said Sacramento would lose 9 more games, but I have watched Amir Johnson for years and know he is a solid 10, and 8 guy who never backs down. Then you got Ed Davis who is just dripping talent, which if he hits the weight room could be a starter or even better.
Though it's a moot point D.J. Augustin is an upgrade over John Lucas.
I will be the first to admit that not all the trades on this forum are good. But can someone please agree with me that the espn trade machine has some real if not huge flaws?
Why on earth would the Kings do that?
Cause it free up the log jam at SG with Thortan, Jimmer. It also lets Brooks, and Thomas get more mins. Down low they get more depth, and a solid core going forward.
I wonder if the fact that Granger is injured factors in.... I have heard some people think Granger may never be the player he was 2 years ago..
I do agree it seems funny the way the trade machine spits out win improvements.
The site keeps telling me I have triggered a spam guard. Smh
I'm like how you complained about people making stupid trade ideas then do one yourself
are you kidding me
So you say that you are tired of seeing bad trades on this site, then post a trade where a team trades 3 of their last 4 draft picks (Evans, DMC, T-Rob and keep the draft pick that is the worst (Jimmer)?
No matter how crazy DMC gets he isn't going anywhere unless its for a star player, big men are rare in the NBA, so when you get a young big man that can score and rebound but is crazy you don't trade him, you fire the people around him, (hence the reason he fired his agent and Keith Smart is next to go). Evans might not be a superstar but he is good enough to be a starting 2 guard in the league so why trade him, so Marcus Thornton and Jimmer can shoot 20 times a game, no. And T-Rob is a rookie can you give him til the all star break to actually get his foot in the door before you trade him.
So with this trade Sac is basically conceding that "Hey,we suck at drafting,so were basically gonna give away 3 out of our last 4 draft pics for a guy who's currently injured and two other guys you probably wouldn't pay money to watch play in the first place."
The Raptors would love this!
What if there was a way to get the Heat involved? Send him down to Miami along with a couple of contracts (Garcia, maybe Hayes) in return for Bosh and a scrub. Cousins would finally be motivated to play hard for a winner, and Miami would finally have a truly dominant center that can score and rebound consistently, and the Kings could get a revamped Bosh who can put up stellar numbers as a first option.
looks like one big troll xD
"Complains about bad trades and then posts one"...
This is good comedy. Thanks for the early Christmas gift.
original poster is probably 11 years old.
you're on -14 so far, but hey, it's christmas. let's focus on the positives here.
sure, that trade is utter BS. but the original idea of a Grainger-Evans trade isn't actually that bad.
First off, I hate Tyreke Evans' game. They really need to trade him, but unless he gets into a situation that is PERFECT for him, when he can dominate the ball and make plays for others from the 2 spot, with a smart PG who can knock down the open 3, his value will plummet. I think that Indiana could be a perfect situation for him- and I think there are very few situations that would be.
Evans playing with a legit big man for pick & roll options (Hibbert), a secondary big for pick & pop options (West), a great 3 point shooter and second shot creator (George) and a smart, tough PG who doesn't need to dominate the ball to be effective? Sounds pretty perfect to me. Sure, it stunts Lance Stephenson's surprising development, but hey, he could go the other way.
Sac-town is a mess. And one of their biggest problems is the conundrum of their backcourt, their lack of a leader, and the lack of size defending on the perimeter. Grainger (if fit, after he comes back) could solve all three. You can send Brooks or Thomas back the other way to really make a strong decision about who is your PG of the future.
So ideally, I wouldn't offer a definitive trade as that's a one-way route to neg-city, but hey- something like Evans+Brooks+Garcia for Grainger+Stephenson, with picks and minor players balancing it any way you see fit, could work for both teams.
Merry Christmas all!
I like Evans to Indy as well and gave it some thought awhile back. It actually makes sense from a standpoint that Indy tried to get Mayo twice to be the teams SG but bringing in Garcia and Brooks doesn't do any justice, it just makes the team very guard heavy. Who plays off the ball Hill or Evans?
i think hill could play a little more off the ball...set up the offense early but then get evans involved on the pick & roll, or run the 2 man game early in the clock with one of the bigs and then give evans the iso on the weakside. there's a few options...and with hill shooting his worst 3p % since his rookie year, it might make sense to bring in someone else to handle the ball and create shots, to put him in more 'catch and shoot' situations.
see your point about garcia & brooks, but looking at indiana's team needs, the main weakness isn't depth, it's the strength of their first 5. Evans would help that. Brooks wouldn't, maybe keep Stephenson or add Jason Thompson instead...
so the kings have only one true center on their team and 3 power forwards and they will deal that one center and pf for 2 more? even with ed davis' and amir's good play lately, they will not be able to do the role asked of cousins in sacramento of being the power option inside. im sure sac would be demanding at least another young true center back.
hell, if i was kahn i'd offer Pekovic, Derrick Williams and picks for Cousins and absorb john salmons' contract. at least i could lure the kings on cap relief from salmons' deal while giving back a young center to clog up the middle for the kings.