worldK wrote:Grey, you think russel/mudiay is close to towns/okafor?
Towns/ okafor are the consensus top 2 here. Its never wise to not pick the bpa.
It really depends on how the sixers view towns/okafor vs embiid/noel. If they see towns/okafor as better than embiid/noel then they will draft them and look to trade the other two for the guard they covet. If they like embiid/noel more, then yes they would look to trade down but they wont settle for 2nd round picks as add ons.
A lot of lotto teams covets and need a towns/okafor. We will certainly be outbid if they choose to trade down. I dont see us making a trade swap with them.
I don't see how we could be outbid when we are the only team that can give them Russell who they blatantly want. However they have to get SOMETHING of value to move down and like other posters have said the 1st pick of the 2nd round is somewhat valuable and the perfect piece to flip spots in my opinion.
I just dont see the sixers swaping a top 2 pick for the 3rd or 4th with a 2nd rounder as the only sweetener. They would want more than a high2nd round and they should. Whoever ends up 3rd or 4th(if we end up with 3rd) are going to have 1st round picks and high 2nd's to throw at the sixers. We just trade a first away for payne.
Lets put ourselves on the sixers point of view. Will you trade down with only a 2nd rounder as a sweetener? If i where in charge of the sixers, I would demand bazz + a 2nd or rights to our euro guys coming to us than just a 2nd round +the pick swap. The sixers are going to be in the position of strength here guys. All Im saying is if we offer only the 2nd round a pick swap then the sixers wont bite.
worldK wrote:Grey, you think russel/mudiay is close to towns/okafor?
Towns/ okafor are the consensus top 2 here. Its never wise to not pick the bpa.
It really depends on how the sixers view towns/okafor vs embiid/noel. If they see towns/okafor as better than embiid/noel then they will draft them and look to trade the other two for the guard they covet. If they like embiid/noel more, then yes they would look to trade down but they wont settle for 2nd round picks as add ons.
A lot of lotto teams covets and need a towns/okafor. We will certainly be outbid if they choose to trade down. I dont see us making a trade swap with them.
I don't see how we could be outbid when we are the only team that can give them Russell who they blatantly want. However they have to get SOMETHING of value to move down and like other posters have said the 1st pick of the 2nd round is somewhat valuable and the perfect piece to flip spots in my opinion.
I just dont see the sixers swaping a top 2 pick for the 3rd or 4th with a 2nd rounder as the only sweetener. They would want more than a high2nd round and they should. Whoever ends up 3rd or 4th(if we end up with 3rd) are going to have 1st round picks and high 2nd's to throw at the sixers. We just trade a first away for payne.
Lets put ourselves on the sixers point of view. Will you trade down with only a 2nd rounder as a sweetener? If i where in charge of the sixers, I would demand bazz + a 2nd or rights to our euro guys coming to us than just a 2nd round +the pick swap. The sixers are going to be in the position of strength here guys. All Im saying is if we offer only the 2nd round a pick swap then the sixers wont bite.
If I'm the Sixers and I view Embiid as better than Towns/Okafor then yes I would trade back 1-2 spots for a high 2nd + other flier talent (or maybe just a Bennett/Payne b/c they are simply collecting talent and seeing what sticks). Absolutely no one is outbidding us outside the top 4 unless someone gets crazy with an offer involving young established talent b/c the Sixers are likely after one of those 2 guards. The price you suggest would be extremely high for the difference in talent. Your basically saying the guards are 1 to 2 tiers below Towns/Okafor and that's simply not the case. That drop off isn't there.
I tend to believe they value Embiid more and think him not playing at all this year was them being overly cautious and making sure he was 100% before playing. Lets also not forget he was likely to be the top pick in a draft that included Wiggins if not for that injury.
They'd have leverage, but not nearly enough to demand Bazz or anything else of significance. Don't be ridiculous.
The Sixers could take their guard at 2 or take their guard at 3/4 and add a high second rounder plus a future 2nd if need be, but it might not even be necessary. That would be the framework of the trade IF they were focused on drafting guard.
History can tell us things about the future. In 2006, the Bulls and Blazers did a similar trade to the one being discussed. The Blazers wanted Aldridge and the Bulls wanted Thomas, so the teams agreed to swap picks (2nd and 4th) with a future 2nd going to Portland and the contract of Viktor Khryapa to Chicago. That's essentially it.
Sixers get a lower annual salary for their player they'd take at 3/4, a high second round pick (I'd offer 36 instead of 31 since we'll probably sell it anyway) and they still get their guard. We'd get our big man, whoever that might be. Both teams get what they want.
Camden wrote:They'd have leverage, but not nearly enough to demand Bazz or anything else of significance. Don't be ridiculous.
The Sixers could take their guard at 2 or take their guard at 3/4 and add a high second rounder plus a future 2nd if need be, but it might not even be necessary. That would be the framework of the trade IF they were focused on drafting guard.
History can tell us things about the future. In 2006, the Bulls and Blazers did a similar trade to the one being discussed. The Blazers wanted Aldridge and the Bulls wanted Thomas, so the teams agreed to swap picks (2nd and 4th) with a future 2nd going to Portland and the contract of Viktor Khryapa to Chicago. That's essentially it.
Sixers get a lower annual salary for their player they'd take at 3/4, a high second round pick (I'd offer 36 instead of 31 since we'll probably sell it anyway) and they still get their guard. We'd get our big man, whoever that might be. Both teams get what they want.
Cam, history tells us that the bulls got hosed in that trade! Dont be ridiculous cam! That is a bad example to bring up. lol
Camden wrote:They'd have leverage, but not nearly enough to demand Bazz or anything else of significance. Don't be ridiculous.
The Sixers could take their guard at 2 or take their guard at 3/4 and add a high second rounder plus a future 2nd if need be, but it might not even be necessary. That would be the framework of the trade IF they were focused on drafting guard.
History can tell us things about the future. In 2006, the Bulls and Blazers did a similar trade to the one being discussed. The Blazers wanted Aldridge and the Bulls wanted Thomas, so the teams agreed to swap picks (2nd and 4th) with a future 2nd going to Portland and the contract of Viktor Khryapa to Chicago. That's essentially it.
Sixers get a lower annual salary for their player they'd take at 3/4, a high second round pick (I'd offer 36 instead of 31 since we'll probably sell it anyway) and they still get their guard. We'd get our big man, whoever that might be. Both teams get what they want.
Cam, history tells us that the bulls got hosed in that trade! Dont be ridiculous cam. That is a bad example to bring up.
They only got hosed because of the player they took. That mistake is on the scouting end, not the trade value itself. What if they had taken Brandon Roy or Rudy Gay? It's a good example.
Camden wrote:They'd have leverage, but not nearly enough to demand Bazz or anything else of significance. Don't be ridiculous.
The Sixers could take their guard at 2 or take their guard at 3/4 and add a high second rounder plus a future 2nd if need be, but it might not even be necessary. That would be the framework of the trade IF they were focused on drafting guard.
History can tell us things about the future. In 2006, the Bulls and Blazers did a similar trade to the one being discussed. The Blazers wanted Aldridge and the Bulls wanted Thomas, so the teams agreed to swap picks (2nd and 4th) with a future 2nd going to Portland and the contract of Viktor Khryapa to Chicago. That's essentially it.
Sixers get a lower annual salary for their player they'd take at 3/4, a high second round pick (I'd offer 36 instead of 31 since we'll probably sell it anyway) and they still get their guard. We'd get our big man, whoever that might be. Both teams get what they want.
Cam, history tells us that the bulls got hosed in that trade! Dont be ridiculous cam. That is a bad example to bring up.
They only got hosed because of the player they took. That mistake is on the scouting end, not the trade value itself. What if they had taken Brandon Roy or Rudy Gay? It's a good example.
Still a bad example cam. The point is the team that trades down almost always lose the trade. Thats why the smart thing to do is demand more than just settle for 2nd round picks if you are in the sixers position. The sixers could easily keep towns/okafor. Yeah, they have bigs and need guards but they have the assets to get that guard. No need to just accept a 2nd round pick to trade down.
You are looking at it purely form our point of view cam. If you are with the sixers you would want to demand more as well and stand your ground. Dont let your bias cloud what you think the sixers would/should accept.
Let's be honest here. It would not be a pick swap. They would take a big and we would take the guard so it would be a player swap. A high second round pick is worth the difference between 2 and 4 in this draft. This trade doesn't get done until we draft the guy they want. They aren't getting a better value than a top 4 pick on a rookie deal from anyone else besides 3 if we drop to 4. Established young talent doesn't trump rookies because they control the rights to the rookie longer than the established talent. The 76ers could be stubborn and demand more, but they don't have the options people mention. That roster is barren. All they have to offer are picks and Okafor/Towns in this scenario and most of those are second round picks. You're not getting a Mudiay or Russell level of talent for picks alone. Also look at the teams at the top of the lottery. The Lakers don't have any guards to give back. The Knicks don't have any guards. Who has a guard with more value than Mudiay or Russell that would be in position to give that guy and more up to get Okafor/Towns? That's why I don't think they can get more than the guard and a high second from us. There isn't another dance partner out there that has an extra star potential guard lying around they can afford to trade for a big. Meanwhile in this scenario we would have Lavine and Russell on our team allowing either to be dealt.
Flip likes 2-way players. Not sure Russell would fit that bill. Not sure about Okafor either. Towns and Mudiay are the two top 4 prospects with high end defensive potential.
Mudiay is an elite athlete who appears to have some Westbrook in him. As for his shooting, I haven't seen enough of him to know how bad he is in that area. But based on what we've all read it appears he has a lot of work to do on his shot.
Russell has a nice looking shot, but he'll have to develop a much better right hand to be a good NBA player. His lack of elite quickness or athleticism leaves Russell with little margin for error if he's going to be a good, much less great NBA player. To be a great NBA guard without great quickness or athleticism generally requires elite ballhandling and the ability to move with the ball using both hands equally well. You'll note that those types of great guards (e.g., Brandon Roy, Steph Curry) appear ambidextrous in the way they handle the ball, get to the rim and finish. Unfortunately that's a basic motor skill that doesn't tend to improve a lot by the time you're 19 or 20.
Watching video of Mudiay and at first I wasn't sure whether he was right-handed or left-handed. That's what you want to see in a guard prospect near the top of the draft. Of course, Curry is an elite shooter and Roy was also a good shooter.
And Russell too is a great shooter. I'll add that he frees himself with his dribble, especially hezzy dribbles. The guy knows how to change speed and direction very well. I'm not worried about D'Angelo offensively. He's going to be a stud. I worry about him on defense, whether he's at PG or SG, especially if he's at SG.
If the worry about ending up at 4 is because of the talent falloff, okay. But if it's because "we need a center and they are going 1-2", that's silly.
When you pick #1 to #4, you are wanting to get that transcendental player that is going to be a star in 3 years (reference Davis in NO this year) and a pivotal player for 10 years. Which means: get the best darn player available and don't worry about position. If that's Mudiay, who just turned 19 and is 6 years younger than Ricky, so be it. If it's Russell or Winslow or Porzingis or one of the big guys, so be it. Just get the best player available at where ever we end up and add to our talent base... then things will work out over the next 3 years.
As such, IMO this thread should only be talking about who are the best four players, not worrying about positional needs. At least, until May 19th.
