• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country


Community Reputation

357 Excellent

About gurpilo

  • Rank
    6th Man

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,282 profile views
  1. ???, I don't know what to think about that answer 😆😂😂
  2. Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Boston, Brooklin, Toronto, Indiana, Miami, Detroit and Orlando are better in my opinion. Miami might be in discussion but they added Butler, Herro and Leonard and lost Richardson and Witheside, they have 3 young up and cong players that will improve in Adebayo, Derrick Jomes Jr and Winslow, they could improve their 39 wins.
  3. I expect an improvement but I don't think we should realistically expect to make the playoffs as we are a new and very young team. I expect improvement from Trae, John and Huerter, solid (same as last year) contributions from Len and Bembry and early and even season struggles from Reddish and Hunter, they are really young and although they could show some highlights is difficult they can produce consistently. I am expecting offensive struggle from Hunter and overall struggle from Cam. Wild cards will be Crabbe, Parker and Jones if they exceesd last year production perhaps we could make it but I think we still have many weaknesses to make the playoffs.
  4. I think that lineup would be weak , we would lack size at PF and C, I think is better keeping Collins at PF to have chances to win a ring. That lineup would be similar to that Suns with Nash and Stoudemire at C, they did not win anything despite having Marion. Size and defense matters specially in playoffs
  5. I find strange we keep signing PF while our clear need is at C and PG. Once we signed Spalding I thought we were heading for a C, not another PF.
  6. According to Sam Charania Warriors free agent Marcus Derrickson has agreed to a deal (Exhibit 10) with the Atlanta Hawks, league sources tell Small PF, good shooter, good wingspan, played for the Warriors and made a good preseason
  7. I agree with Clarke's long term position as SF. I also see Clarke as a generational talent defensively, I think the Marion comparison can be true at the end. But he is not our guy, our guy is Hunter, I would have preferes him to play as Clarke on summer league, I hope with a true PG and a better team he will do better. My only concern with Hunter is the offense, I think he could struggle to produce at NBA level, playing with Trae is only going to help. On defense he will need to play with high energy to be able to score on Rb Stl and Block categories, anyway his best quality will be one on one defense.
  8. I agree, I wanted Clarke... And I was right, few rookies are named summer league MVP, he is going to be a stud. Anyway I am not taking the view of the article, I like what we did, I don't think it was a nightmare but is also true that xobsidering value we gave too much for Hunter whose ceiling might be Trevor Ariza, which is fine, we needed that but not at the cost we pay, Hayes, Clarke, Gafford, 2 2nds and eating Hill's contract.... Only eating Hill's contract should be worth a first, that's my point. Having said that I really like Hunter, I hope he becomes something more than Ariza and hope that he does not get pressed by the cost of the trade. Do I like him more than Clarke? Yes. Do I like him more than Hayes, Clarke, Bruno.....? No. I think he fits well but so did other players.
  9. 6 rookies are not too much if 2-3 of them do not play at all and are on G-league. Value on this year 2nd round was much much higher than any year
  10. I don't see how a FA would see aa a good thing to pay Parsons instead of investing in youth. We could always have trade fof a bad contract and get a first.
  11. At the end is Do you prefer Hayes over Jones? Do you prefer Bol over Spalding? Do you prefer Bradziekis over Parsons? My answer for all these questions ia YES. This was an incredibly deep draft and we selled cheap some picks, it was clear there was going to be some bargains at 35-41--44 picks. And for next season is this a bad team you would consider as FA? Young Huerter Reddish/Clarke/Bradzeikis Collins/Clarke/Bol Hayes/Fernando
  12. 3 rookies are a nightmare if you are trying to win, are not a nightmare if you are rebuilding as we are. I don't think we had a nightmare draft, I understand why we traded for Hunter but at the same time I see that we clearly overpay for him. As I said we could have commited to develop Hayes, Reddish and Clarke and let Bruno, Bradzeikis and Bol to earn their minutes. Instead of that we have comitted to develop Hunter and Reddish, Hayes minutes would go to Damian Jones, Bruno still has to earn his minutes and the minutes that Bradzeikis and Bol were going to earn will go to Parsons, Parker or Bembry... I prefer the other alternative, I also think Clarke could eventually play SF. At the end I like Hunter but probably a trade of 8 & 17 and Hill's contract would have been more fair. I wanted my guy Clarke.
  13. Is easy to understand that most probably Hunter in the future will not be worth Hayes, Clarke or NAW or Little and Gafford or Bradzeikis plus losing another 2nds. If we have stayed pat no trades, we could have drafted Hayes, Reddish, Clarke, Bruno, Bradzeikis, Bol. Young/ Turner/? Huerter/Crabbe/Bembry Reddish/Clarke/Bradzeikis Collins/Parker/Clarke/Bol Len/Hayes/Bruno I don't see the problem drafting six rookies. We commit to development on Reddish, Clarke and Hayes and Bruno, Bradzeikis and Bol need to earn it, that would happen with Bruno anyway.
  14. Agreed, let's think this way, is it better our draft that a potential draft of Hayes, Reddish, Clarke, Gafford, Bruno, Bradzeikis and Bol and keeping Clev pick? I don't think so and I like Hunter a lot.