Buddy Hield

[Lipoli390]

I've proposed that exact deal -- Jarrett Culver, James Johnson, and the 17th-overall pick for Buddy Hield -- on a different thread. I'd be in favor of it, especially if James Wiseman is taken with the first pick. I think that would be good value for both sides given the circumstances, but favors Minnesota more because Hield is a quality player. He's in the same NBA tier as C.J. McCollum and Malcolm Brogdon, in my opinion. That's a good get given the price.

A buddy of mine that is a Kings fan and has a fair amount of Kings fans following him on Twitter reaffirmed that the proposed deal is what they would ask for in such a deal if they were the GM.

Obviously, we're just spitballing trades as fans, but at least this one seems to be pretty realistic in terms of an offer.

I don't like that deal for several reasons. First, the last thing we need is another poor defender in our rotation with KAT and DLO. I might feel differently if Rosas hadn't cast his lot with DLO as our other all-star to pair with KAT. Drafting Wiseman (or Okongwu) would help if either can be as good defensively as many project, but not enough in my view to make up for the poor defenders around them. Second, Buddy is a great shooter, but he's purely one-dimensional and is, therefore, overpaid. Third, trading for Buddy would likely mean that Beasley won't re-sign here because he's clearly looking for the chance to be a starting SG. And that would mean we essentially wasted the assets (Covington) we dealt for him. Finally, I think the deal you've sketched out is too much for Buddy. Dealing last year's #6 pick before he's had a chance to develop in addition to this year's 17th pick strikes me as too much for a one-dimensional player no matter how good a shooter he is. That's just my view.

I'd re-sign Beasley to a cheaper contract than Buddy's. Beasley is younger than Buddy and, I believe, has more upside as a passer, ballhandler and defender. Draft well and develop Culver. Unless we can package Culver for an elite player like Simmons or Beal, the Wolves organization should keep and develop him. It's about time this organization developed their young talent and that requires some patience. They showed too much patience with Wiggins, who clearly displayed a lack of competitive drive to improve from the beginning. I recall be told by someone in the organization about Flip screaming at Wiggins for his lack of effort in practice. That person said Flip used language they'd never heard from him before. Yet, they gave him almost 6 full seasons and a max contract before finally trading him. But players like Culver are the ones worthy of patience. He's reputed to have a great worth ethic and, while quiet, you can see a lot of competitive fire in him. Most really good NBA players improve significantly after their rookie season and tend to show their greatest improvement between their 2nd and 3rd seasons. I didn't like the Wolves trading up for Culver, but I would absolutely not bale on him now for anyone other than a third star and that's not Buddy.

[Monster]

I've proposed that exact deal -- Jarrett Culver, James Johnson, and the 17th-overall pick for Buddy Hield -- on a different thread. I'd be in favor of it, especially if James Wiseman is taken with the first pick. I think that would be good value for both sides given the circumstances, but favors Minnesota more because Hield is a quality player. He's in the same NBA tier as C.J. McCollum and Malcolm Brogdon, in my opinion. That's a good get given the price.

A buddy of mine that is a Kings fan and has a fair amount of Kings fans following him on Twitter reaffirmed that the proposed deal is what they would ask for in such a deal if they were the GM.

Obviously, we're just spitballing trades as fans, but at least this one seems to be pretty realistic in terms of an offer.

I don't like that deal for several reasons. First, the last thing we need is another poor defender in our rotation with KAT and DLO. I might feel differently if Rosas hadn't cast his lot with DLO as our other all-star to pair with KAT. Drafting Wiseman (or Okongwu) would help if either can be as good defensively as many project, but not enough in my view to make up for the poor defenders around them. Second, Buddy is a great shooter, but he's purely one-dimensional and is, therefore, overpaid. Third, trading for Buddy would likely mean that Beasley won't re-sign here because he's clearly looking for the chance to be a starting SG. And that would mean we essentially wasted the assets (Covington) we dealt for him. Finally, I think the deal you've sketched out is too much for Buddy. Dealing last year's #6 pick before he's had a chance to develop in addition to this year's 17th pick strikes me as too much for a one-dimensional player no matter how good a shooter he is. That's just my view.

I'd re-sign Beasley to a cheaper contract than Buddy's. Beasley is younger than Buddy and, I believe, has more upside as a passer, ballhandler and defender. Draft well and develop Culver. Unless we can package Culver for an elite player like Simmons or Beal, the Wolves organization should keep and develop him. It's about time this organization developed their young talent and that requires some patience. They showed too much patience with Wiggins, who clearly displayed a lack of competitive drive to improve from the beginning. I recall be told by someone in the organization about Flip screaming at Wiggins for his lack of effort in practice. That person said Flip used language they'd never heard from him before. Yet, they gave him almost 6 full seasons and a max contract before finally trading him. But players like Culver are the ones worthy of patience. He's reputed to have a great worth ethic and, while quiet, you can see a lot of competitive fire in him. Most really good NBA players improve significantly after their rookie season and tend to show their greatest improvement between their 2nd and 3rd seasons. I didn't like the Wolves trading up for Culver, but I would absolutely not bale on him now for anyone other than a third star and that's not Buddy.

If you told me we traded Covinginton for Buddy a few months ago I would have had zero problems with it. I'd jump on this deal with no hesitation and if Beasley walks he walks. Im a big fan of Beasley but the reality is he might just be a bench player. I'm not giving up on Culver but I'm not holding up a deal Because of him for adding one of the best 3 point shooters in the league. The only thing that bring a pause is Buddy's age.

[Crazysauce]

I think lip is right. I like the idea of having hield however his contract is rather large. I think a lot would depend on how much it would take in order to sign Beasley. Beasley is only 23 while Hield is 27. I also see Beasley being better defensively and has much more room for improvement. If we can get Beasley signed to 12 to 14 mill per year I like that better than Hields 18 to 24 million per. Its got to be considered a bad contract at this point.

Who i really want to deal for on the kings is marvin bagley. Seems like they wasnt to move him with new ownership and I would love to deal 17 for him. Or maybe deal Culver for him. Think Bagley will blow up in next year or two.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Buddy Hield is appropriately paid. He's a 20/5/3 wing over the past two seasons despite being yanked around by the Kings coaching staff. He's one of the best three-point shooters in the league in terms of volume and efficiency. In a league that puts a premium on shooting and perimeter scorers, he's worth his contract.

He's also paid less than C.J. McCollum and Jamal Murray, and comparably to Malcolm Brogdon despite being that caliber of player.

I think we need to collectively pump the brakes on the Malik Beasley hype. I liked what he produced in 14 games for the Wolves, but it was only 14 games. He also showed that his offensive game is limited and he's inconsistent from half to half.

[Monster]

I think lip is right. I like the idea of having hield however his contract is rather large. I think a lot would depend on how much it would take in order to sign Beasley. Beasley is only 23 while Hield is 27. I also see Beasley being better defensively and has much more room for improvement. If we can get Beasley signed to 12 to 14 mill per year I like that better than Hields 18 to 24 million per. Its got to be considered a bad contract at this point.

Who i really want to deal for on the kings is marvin bagley. Seems like they wasnt to move him with new ownership and I would love to deal 17 for him. Or maybe deal Culver for him. Think Bagley will blow up in next year or two.

Buddy's contract starts next season and he is locked in for 4 years. The problem to me about comparing him to Beasley is the unknown with Beasley. How much will he cost? How good (or bad) is he? I feel like we know Buddy is a good player and this team needs shooting. If the cap doesn't drop off the face of the earth that deal for him will likely be just fine. Mid-level guys will be making about 10 million. Unless the Kings love Culver I'd guess they would get a better offer for Buddy but who knows.

Bagley is an interesting player. My friend who is a Kings fan likes him but I asked if he plays any D and my friend who is usually kind about these things didn't give any nuance and simply said "No". Lol for #17 I'd be pretty interested though. I'd kinda had thoughts wondering how he compares to Toppin.

[thedoper]

Have two good shooters seems like a very unMinnesota problem to have. If we could get buddy Hield for Culver and the 17 that is highway robbery. Gives a more defined role to Okogie too. I would love that deal, I just think Sacramento could do better unless they really see something in Culver.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

I'd take Buddy over Beasley. I prefer the consistency of Buddy over the hot and cold that you can see with Beasley. Beasley is a 6th man that when he's on he's helping you and when he's off you have to sit him. That can't be our starting 2 if we want to be good. I don't care about age. The only ages that matter on this team are KAT, D Lo and our number 1 pick. The rest of the team is going to be role players that you don't need to plan 5-6-7 years around with the main pieces. Stop trying to secure role players for a decade with the core. That's not how the NBA works.

[Lipoli390]

I've proposed that exact deal -- Jarrett Culver, James Johnson, and the 17th-overall pick for Buddy Hield -- on a different thread. I'd be in favor of it, especially if James Wiseman is taken with the first pick. I think that would be good value for both sides given the circumstances, but favors Minnesota more because Hield is a quality player. He's in the same NBA tier as C.J. McCollum and Malcolm Brogdon, in my opinion. That's a good get given the price.

A buddy of mine that is a Kings fan and has a fair amount of Kings fans following him on Twitter reaffirmed that the proposed deal is what they would ask for in such a deal if they were the GM.

Obviously, we're just spitballing trades as fans, but at least this one seems to be pretty realistic in terms of an offer.

I don't like that deal for several reasons. First, the last thing we need is another poor defender in our rotation with KAT and DLO. I might feel differently if Rosas hadn't cast his lot with DLO as our other all-star to pair with KAT. Drafting Wiseman (or Okongwu) would help if either can be as good defensively as many project, but not enough in my view to make up for the poor defenders around them. Second, Buddy is a great shooter, but he's purely one-dimensional and is, therefore, overpaid. Third, trading for Buddy would likely mean that Beasley won't re-sign here because he's clearly looking for the chance to be a starting SG. And that would mean we essentially wasted the assets (Covington) we dealt for him. Finally, I think the deal you've sketched out is too much for Buddy. Dealing last year's #6 pick before he's had a chance to develop in addition to this year's 17th pick strikes me as too much for a one-dimensional player no matter how good a shooter he is. That's just my view.

I'd re-sign Beasley to a cheaper contract than Buddy's. Beasley is younger than Buddy and, I believe, has more upside as a passer, ballhandler and defender. Draft well and develop Culver. Unless we can package Culver for an elite player like Simmons or Beal, the Wolves organization should keep and develop him. It's about time this organization developed their young talent and that requires some patience. They showed too much patience with Wiggins, who clearly displayed a lack of competitive drive to improve from the beginning. I recall be told by someone in the organization about Flip screaming at Wiggins for his lack of effort in practice. That person said Flip used language they'd never heard from him before. Yet, they gave him almost 6 full seasons and a max contract before finally trading him. But players like Culver are the ones worthy of patience. He's reputed to have a great worth ethic and, while quiet, you can see a lot of competitive fire in him. Most really good NBA players improve significantly after their rookie season and tend to show their greatest improvement between their 2nd and 3rd seasons. I didn't like the Wolves trading up for Culver, but I would absolutely not bale on him now for anyone other than a third star and that's not Buddy.

If you told me we traded Covinginton for Buddy a few months ago I would have had zero problems with it. I'd jump on this deal with no hesitation and if Beasley walks he walks. Im a big fan of Beasley but the reality is he might just be a bench player. I'm not giving up on Culver but I'm not holding up a deal Because of him for adding one of the best 3 point shooters in the league. The only thing that bring a pause is Buddy's age.

Me too. If it's just Covington, then fine. But in the deal suggested above, we're also giving up Culver and the 17th pick, not to mention Johnson who helps this team defensively. And Buddy cost more.

[Lipoli390]

I'd take Buddy over Beasley. I prefer the consistency of Buddy over the hot and cold that you can see with Beasley. Beasley is a 6th man that when he's on he's helping you and when he's off you have to sit him. That can't be our starting 2 if we want to be good. I don't care about age. The only ages that matter on this team are KAT, D Lo and our number 1 pick. The rest of the team is going to be role players that you don't need to plan 5-6-7 years around with the main pieces. Stop trying to secure role players for a decade with the core. That's not how the NBA works.

Buddy IS a role player. He's a perimeter shooter - a very good one but that's all he is

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I'd take Buddy over Beasley. I prefer the consistency of Buddy over the hot and cold that you can see with Beasley. Beasley is a 6th man that when he's on he's helping you and when he's off you have to sit him. That can't be our starting 2 if we want to be good. I don't care about age. The only ages that matter on this team are KAT, D Lo and our number 1 pick. The rest of the team is going to be role players that you don't need to plan 5-6-7 years around with the main pieces. Stop trying to secure role players for a decade with the core. That's not how the NBA works.

Buddy IS a role player. He's a perimeter shooter - a very good one but that's all he is

I think you're underrating him, Lip. And in the same breath you're overrating Beasley.

Hield is more of a secondary scorer than he is a role player. The guy has averaged a very efficient 20 PPG the last two seasons with a TS% of .577. That's better than role player territory. Robert Covington is a role player. Jerami Grant is a role player. Buddy Hield, Jamal Murray, C.J. McCollum, D'Angelo Russell -- secondary scorers. They can carry an offense for spurts consistently.