Klay Thompson to ATL?

[TheNorthCydeRises]

But who is ever a "clear cut" #1 guy in a Bud/San Antonio system?  The one thing that Klay DOES bring to the table though, is that he can be that #1 guy if asked to play that role.  And he can be a very explosive scorer, who can also defend.   This is Klay without Curry, in the playoffs.

 

 

You put Klay in THIS SYSTEM?  And have him in a Kyle Korver role where most of his shots are coming off screens and catch and shoot looks?  He flat out thrives.   And unlike Korver, he has the ability to create off the dribble.  Despite his struggles in the first 3 weeks of the season ( and honestly since the Olympics ), this is an all time great shooter we're talking about here.

I mean, who does this?

 

 

[h4wkfan]

It's a pipe dream that won't happen unless GS undervalues him like crazy and thinks the world of late 1st round picks, prince, baze, splitter, or bembry.  

we simply don't match up. and those wanting to include howard are crazy. our starting center is then either moose or hump.... 

[Guest]

Klay would be our best wing player.

It just depends on what you have to give up to get him.  Parting with Millsap or Dwight for him doesn't make us better.  It would have to be a trade that consolidates all our wing depth plus picks.

But it's not happening - pie in the sky pipe dream.

[AHF]

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Klay would be our best wing player.

It just depends on what you have to give up to get him.  Parting with Millsap or Dwight for him doesn't make us better.  It would have to be a trade that consolidates all our wing depth plus picks.

But it's not happening - pie in the sky pipe dream.

The only possible combination that would work that I see would be giving them wing talent, picks, and a big man so they can start to address their terrible lack of depth/height in the frontcourt and they get back some useful pieces in addition.  Basically, a trade that gives them a lot more depth in a couple areas and seriously upgrades our best wing player.  I'd be all up for that.  Just don't  have confidence that they would.

(When I say a big man I don't mean either Sap or Dwight - I'm talking something like Splitter, Korver or Thabo or THJr, and one or more picks.)

[Sothron]

They aren't trading Klay. He'd have to demand a trade for them to move him and I guarantee there's other teams willing to give over the farm to get him.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Sothron said:

They aren't trading Klay. He'd have to demand a trade for them to move him and I guarantee there's other teams willing to give over the farm to get him.

Ultimately you're right.  In reality, Durant and Curry are free agents after this season.  They're not going to put themselves in a position of potentially losing all 3 of them and being left with a team headlined by freaking Crowder, Bradley and Mr. Overrated (Dreymond).

[AHF]

18 minutes ago, Sothron said:

They aren't trading Klay. He'd have to demand a trade for them to move him and I guarantee there's other teams willing to give over the farm to get him.

I agree but I am more of the mind of @Hotlanta1981 that he is not a franchise guy.  He is a very good wing but if he is your #1 then you aren't winning anything of consequence.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, AHF said:

I agree but I am more of the mind of @Hotlanta1981 that he is not a franchise guy.  He is a very good wing but if he is your #1 then you aren't winning anything of consequence.

That's actually an interesting notion that you stole from Hots stumbled upon.  I understand Klay is capable of putting up numbers but I don't think he's able to do it while being the focus of the opposing team's defense.  I mean, he can't just keep backing up and jacking longer 3's to get away from the defense.

I'm not sure there are many guys that can do that while winning.  I don't even think (and I'm not trying to be funny with the UK thing for once) Anthony Davis can do it and he's ultra-talented.  Just illustrates the degree to which you have to be a balanced team in order to win.

[Sothron]

22 minutes ago, AHF said:

I agree but I am more of the mind of @Hotlanta1981 that he is not a franchise guy.  He is a very good wing but if he is your #1 then you aren't winning anything of consequence.

He's this generation's Joe Johnson.

[AHF]

5 minutes ago, kg01 said:

That's actually an interesting notion that you stole from Hots stumbled upon.  I understand Klay is capable of putting up numbers but I don't think he's able to do it while being the focus of the opposing team's defense.  I mean, he can't just keep backing up and jacking longer 3's to get away from the defense.

I'm not sure there are many guys that can do that while winning.  I don't even think (and I'm not trying to be funny with the UK thing for once) Anthony Davis can do it and he's ultra-talented.  Just illustrates the degree to which you have to be a balanced team in order to win.

Yeah, he reminds me some of a guy like Mitch Richmond.  Kid would look bonkers as a the beneficiary of a bunch of open looks but try to make him the centerpiece of your team and you are looking at some borderline playoff teams.  Good player but not someone for whom you should gut your team or put it out of balance.

(On the opening line, what else do you want me to do other than give him props and drop an @Hots?  Spud do something to get your panties in a wad?)

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, AHF said:

Yeah, he reminds me some of a guy like Mitch Richmond.  Kid would look bonkers as a the beneficiary of a bunch of open looks but try to make him the centerpiece of your team and you are looking at some borderline playoff teams.  Good player but not someone for whom you should gut your team or put it out of balance.

(On the opening line, what else do you want me to do other than give him props and drop an @Hots?  Spud do something to get your panties in a wad?)

That's probably not a bad comparison.  I could see Thompson making a bunch of all-star teams as the lead offensive player on a non-playoff team but never really win anything.

And I think you sufficiently credited Hots.  Just messin' witcha as usual.  No need to get your thong in a twist (again).

[AHF]

4 minutes ago, kg01 said:

That's probably not a bad comparison.  I could see Thompson making a bunch of all-star teams as the lead offensive player on a non-playoff team but never really win anything.

And I think you sufficiently credited Hots.  Just messin' witcha as usual.  No need to get your thong in a twist (again).

[Guest]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

*dislike* button.  Somebody bann him!

[Plainview1981]

7 hours ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

But who is ever a "clear cut" #1 guy in a Bud/San Antonio system?  The one thing that Klay DOES bring to the table though, is that he can be that #1 guy if asked to play that role.  And he can be a very explosive scorer, who can also defend.   This is Klay without Curry, in the playoffs.

 

 

You put Klay in THIS SYSTEM?  And have him in a Kyle Korver role where most of his shots are coming off screens and catch and shoot looks?  He flat out thrives.   And unlike Korver, he has the ability to create off the dribble.  Despite his struggles in the first 3 weeks of the season ( and honestly since the Olympics ), this is an all time great shooter we're talking about here.

I mean, who does this?

 

 

What I'm saying is that for Klay to perform his best he needs to be in a system like the Hawks, SA and the Warriors have and he is better off not being the number one guy or his shooting percentages will drop. IMO. He is a real good shooter that becomes a more volume scorer as a number one guy. Over an 82 game season you would see him become less efficient. IMO.

Edited November 16, 2016 by Hotlanta1981

[Guest]

21 hours ago, AHF said:

Yeah, he reminds me some of a guy like Mitch Richmond.  Kid would look bonkers as a the beneficiary of a bunch of open looks but try to make him the centerpiece of your team and you are looking at some borderline playoff teams.  Good player but not someone for whom you should gut your team or put it out of balance.

(On the opening line, what else do you want me to do other than give him props and drop an @Hots?  Spud do something to get your panties in a wad?)

Lol...ummmmm...:-|

 

(walking away slowly...)

[AHF]

On 11/17/2016 at 7:13 AM, Spud2Nique said:

Lol...ummmmm...:-|

 

(walking away slowly...)

You don't like Mitch Richmond?

[Sothron]

Mitch Richmond was a legit #1 option and the best SG in the NBA for years not named Jordan. Klay is not at that level.

[bleachkit]

Id sell the farm for Klay. I think he's a stud.

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, AHF said:

You don't like Mitch Richmond?

I love rock. It's funny I'm such a Warrior hater and when rock game into the league in 88 he just started handing it to all the great shooting guards back then like Drexler, Dale Ellis and of course MJ and I really loved his style of play. I knew he was special as a rookie because he played with no fear and drove very hard to the basket even though he was a great shooter. Also, Don Nelson never played rookies but he couldn't keep Mitch off the floor.

 

Needless to say, I was very happy when the Warriors traded Mitch to the Kings. The Kings backcourt of Mitch n Spud was my fav western team for sure. They had a good young team with those guys, L train, Duane Causwell, Travis Mays (who later became a Hawk, loved that guy, not sure why lol). 

 

Klay is a great player, but I do believe Richmond was better, IMO.

[AHF]

58 minutes ago, Sothron said:

Mitch Richmond was a legit #1 option and the best SG in the NBA for years not named Jordan. Klay is not at that level.

He was in the mix with Clyde Drexler, Dan Majerle, Joe Dumars, and Reggie Miller (and possibly a few others) in that next tier of people a long way short of Jordan.  Really good player but not a franchise/MVP type of guy.  While it wasn't purely his fault that his teams never won anything of any note (credit Sacto management first and foremost), he had plenty of time to show he could drag a subpar team into the playoffs but he only made the playoffs once as the #1 guy and only won 1 game during that series.  I think the comparison is fair.