Would you do Beasley for Collins

[FNG]

Thanks for correcting me, monster...I was incorrectly quoting from D'Angelo's previous season. which I'm sure everyone would agree was a disaster. Now I see why kek referred to that one good season. I would agree he was the Nets best player in 2018-9. While the offense was not as good when he was on the floor compared to off, the Nets actually gave up 3.9 FEWER points per 100 possessions when he was on the court...certainly an aberration in his 6-year career as he actually was a positive 1.4 points per 100 possessions overall.

Maybe if we want to cling to a small ray of hope, it would be that 2018-9 season when he was actually a positive player... albeit by the smallest of margins. An optimist can say if he can do it one year, he can do it again. The fact that he hasn't had positive numbers his other five years might be a counterargument.

But we'll always have Paris. And we'll always have 2018-19...

Don't worry. You can always just bring up the 2019 playoffs if you want to get back on track...

I'm not following your point. D'Angelo was second in the team in scoring during those playoffs at 19.4 PPG...what's wrong with that?

And if you're going to bring up that he was a combined -89 in the 5 games, you know where you can stuff that stat. Joe Harris was almost as bad at -79...I suppose you're gonna rip Joey Hoops now too?

Whew...I'm back on track. Thanks for the nudge, Abe.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Note to self. The 2018-19 Brooklyn Nets unexpectedly made the playoffs because of -- wait for it -- DeMarre Carroll, not D'Angelo Russell despite the latter playing 700 more minutes than the former. Jarrett Allen and Joe Harris were also negative players that year too. Got it... Groundbreaking stuff here, guys. Bravo.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Thanks for correcting me, monster...I was incorrectly quoting from D'Angelo's previous season. which I'm sure everyone would agree was a disaster. Now I see why kek referred to that one good season. I would agree he was the Nets best player in 2018-9. While the offense was not as good when he was on the floor compared to off, the Nets actually gave up 3.9 FEWER points per 100 possessions when he was on the court...certainly an aberration in his 6-year career as he actually was a positive 1.4 points per 100 possessions overall.

Maybe if we want to cling to a small ray of hope, it would be that 2018-9 season when he was actually a positive player... albeit by the smallest of margins. An optimist can say if he can do it one year, he can do it again. The fact that he hasn't had positive numbers his other five years might be a counterargument.

But we'll always have Paris. And we'll always have 2018-19...

Don't worry. You can always just bring up the 2019 playoffs if you want to get back on track...

I'm not following your point. D'Angelo was second in the team in scoring during those playoffs at 19.4 PPG...what's wrong with that?

And if you're going to bring up that he was a combined -89 in the 5 games, you know where you can stuff that stat. Joe Harris was almost as bad at -79...I suppose you're gonna rip Joey Hoops now too?

Whew...I'm back on track. Thanks for the nudge, Abe.

To be fair... Russell is ripped for those playoffs.

35.9% fg... 20.6 fg in less than 30 minutes... -89 or whatever... is not good. But we don't hear much about Joe Harris. He was atrocious.

A guy who shot 47% on three pointers during the regular season shot 19% in the playoffs and had a 1-to-3 assist-to-TO ratio.



[Note: By the way, D. Carroll shot 23.7% fg in that series.]

[Hicks123 [enjin:6700838]]

Hmmmm...... please keep in mind I didn't read through all 11 pages of responses to see where they jive with what I will say.

Here is where I sit. If you can land the BY FAR superior player (major components being Beasley vs Collins), considering Beasley's transgressions over the past year, then you do this in record time. Is this really even a question?

Many on this board questioned (for very good reason) bringing Beasley back at all. If I have learned something over the years, it is that these types of incidents are not typically a one-and-done thing. I have personally been wondering when the other shoe will drop with Beas.

And let me also say, I love the shooting aspect he brings to this team so desperate for this skill. That said, Collins is better at this skill, and he plays a position we desperately need to improve. Would be crazy-town if we land Collins for Beasley as major component leaving our side.

When I manage trades via NBA Trade machine, here is what I come up with for trade that "works" in the machine. It is also likely IMO this is what it would cost Wolves:

ATL gets: Beasley / Culver
MN gets: Collins / Bogdanovic / Snell

I add Culver based on comment in post somewhere that they actually may like him. I add Bogdanovic as I can't get trade to work without a LARGE value coming back, and additionally, Bog is vastly underperforming this season.....and I am guessing Atl would require we take him to move off that deal.

So in the end, we are paying Bog $18M next 2 seasons AND adding Collins for near-max deal. Now what do folks think? I likely do it as I don't have to foot the bill:)

[AbeVigodaLive]

Hmmmm...... please keep in mind I didn't read through all 11 pages of responses to see where they jive with what I will say.

Here is where I sit. If you can land the BY FAR superior player (major components being Beasley vs Collins), considering Beasley's transgressions over the past year, then you do this in record time. Is this really even a question?

Many on this board questioned (for very good reason) bringing Beasley back at all. If I have learned something over the years, it is that these types of incidents are not typically a one-and-done thing. I have personally been wondering when the other shoe will drop with Beas.

And let me also say, I love the shooting aspect he brings to this team so desperate for this skill. That said, Collins is better at this skill, and he plays a position we desperately need to improve. Would be crazy-town if we land Collins for Beasley as major component leaving our side.

When I manage trades via NBA Trade machine, here is what I come up with for trade that "works" in the machine. It is also likely IMO this is what it would cost Wolves:

ATL gets: Beasley / Culver
MN gets: Collins / Bogdanovic / Snell

I add Culver based on comment in post somewhere that they actually may like him. I add Bogdanovic as I can't get trade to work without a LARGE value coming back, and additionally, Bog is vastly underperforming this season.....and I am guessing Atl would require we take him to move off that deal.

So in the end, we are paying Bog $18M next 2 seasons AND adding Collins for near-max deal. Now what do folks think? I likely do it as I don't have to foot the bill:)

Bogdonavich has only played in 11 games this season, so I'm going with the thought that his obvious slip has to do with that more than anything. In any event... Atlanta would be jettisoning a prized FA pickup at his absolute lowest value.

Heck, just a few months ago... he was more highly regarded than M. Beasley around the league with multiple teams willing to pay him more money than Beasley got in MN.

As for Culver... he's been a negative player for a full season now (82 games) and there's been no noticeable improvement. He can't shoot... at all... and he's not a good creator either. I don't know why Atlanta would want anything to do with that.

The Wolves won't be alone if they're serious about landing Collins. Another team would beat that offer pretty decisively.

[Coolbreeze44]

Collins AND Bog? We would be giving up a hell of a lot more than Culver and Beasley.

[FNG]

Hicks, I agree with you that we do a deal involving Beas for Collins in a New York minute. I just think we continue to underestimate what Atlanta is going to accept back. Opposing GM's are not dumb and they have access to the same stats we do...and better video. They know Beas has become a terrific shooter and scorer, but they also know that he is an enormous liability on defense. In contrast, Collins is a terrific and improving 2-way player. I don't know that Beas is enough to get their attention, and adding pieces like Culver are more of a negative than a positive.

I think Collins is going to be an attractive target, and the conversation has to include either DLO or Ant. 5 GMs have acquired DLO either by draft or trade, so it's not out of the question that Atlanta wouldn't be intrigued by pairing him with Young. And while Ant's stats have been terrible this year, he was the first pick in the draft and only 19, and he's from Georgia. I think Atlanta might value him higher than other teams.

So, would we give up either DLO or Ant in a deal for Collins? Depends, and opinions here will vary. But I would be in favor of including DLO in a deal, because I think we know what he is and what he can be (with the remote chance that he becomes a plus player if he is paired with KAT...we can hope). I would be reluctant to trade Ant, because I don't think we know what he will become. He may turn out to be not as good as DLO, but I'm willing to roll the dice.

[MikkeMan]

Thanks for correcting me, monster...I was incorrectly quoting from D'Angelo's previous season. which I'm sure everyone would agree was a disaster. Now I see why kek referred to that one good season. I would agree he was the Nets best player in 2018-9. While the offense was not as good when he was on the floor compared to off, the Nets actually gave up 3.9 FEWER points per 100 possessions when he was on the court...certainly an aberration in his 6-year career as he actually was a positive 1.4 points per 100 possessions overall.

Maybe if we want to cling to a small ray of hope, it would be that 2018-9 season when he was actually a positive player... albeit by the smallest of margins. An optimist can say if he can do it one year, he can do it again. The fact that he hasn't had positive numbers his other five years might be a counterargument.

But we'll always have Paris. And we'll always have 2018-19...

It is not just that Russell had positive plus minus on that year but that he was the only their starter (with 40 or more games started) with positive plus minus.

He basically lead team with starting five with below 23 year average age and group of veterans away past their prime to playoffs. I think that it was more than anyone else in Wolves current roster has achieved in their career.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

It's odd to me when D'Angelo Russell is consistently made out to be a negative or non-impactful player by the you-know-who's on this board, but the trade ideas floated around by these same basketball minds are sending him out for a player that's clearly valuable around the league albeit to an unknown degree at this time. Like if D-Lo sucks and provides little or no value to winning on the court then why would Atlanta trade John Collins in any deal for him? Seems pretty irrational to me. Two plus two isn't equaling four here.

[AbeVigodaLive]

It's odd to me when D'Angelo Russell is consistently made out to be a negative or non-impactful player by the you-know-who's on this board, but the trade ideas floated around by these same basketball minds are sending him out for a player that's clearly valuable around the league albeit to an unknown degree at this time. Like if D-Lo sucks and provides little or no value to winning on the court then why would Atlanta trade John Collins in any deal for him? Seems pretty irrational to me. Two plus two isn't equaling four here.

To be fair... oftentimes, ALL Wolves players are overrated. We also just saw a Beasley + Culver for Collins + Bogdonavich trade floated.