Ask Supes

[AHF]

3 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

Well it's too early to call him a bust. A lot of guys suck in year one. Let's see what Antman's true shooting is after his rookie year, it'll probably also be a terrible number.

I'm not calling him a bust.  I'm saying the question is out there.  When he was drafted and as of today, he was never projected to be a stud defender, rebounder or playmaker.  His value was always all about his scoring.  I fully expect he will improve his scoring efficiency.  If he doesn't, however, he is a complete and total bust. 

There aren't many guys who become stars when their game revolves around scoring after that bad of a start.  There are a lot of scoring focused lottery picks who get off to terrible TS% starts and end up busts because they can never make that jump.  

Too early to make the call for him but if you are considering his trade value today you can't ignore just how bad his rookie season was.  Nobody buys into PPG without consideration of scoring efficiency anymore.

[bleachkit]

1 minute ago, JayBirdHawk said:

@NBASupes

 

 

Negotiable for days with Ainge then finally tell him we want Brown or Tatum for #6. They will say no, bit at least it will irritate him and waste his time.

[AHF]

4 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

@NBASupes

 

Does Culver and #17  get you to #6?

We aren't trading Jrue for #6 unless he picks up his option and is willing to extend

We aren't trading #6 for Hayward plus picks - so that's a non starter.

 

You'd have to really buy into Culver to make that deal.  Minnesota wouldn't be offering him in this type of deal unless they'd given up on him.  He is another guy that is too early to call but shows a clear path to bust status based on his terrible rookie year.

[JayBirdHawk]

 

This reads a little confusing.  I think he means moving back and taking on salary of a useful player.

[Dean Walker]

If we trade 6th for culver Travis and co should be fired immediately.

 

[bleachkit]

1 minute ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

This reads a little confusing.  I think he means moving back and taking on salary of a useful player.

Moving back and taking on bad money. We are always fodder for their laughable mock trades.

[NBASupes]

4 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

This reads a little confusing.  I think he means moving back and taking on salary of a useful player.

I mentioned this offer months ago from Minny perspective. 

[JayBirdHawk]

Just now, bleachkit said:

Moving back and taking on bad money. We are always fodder for their laughable mock trades.

Not neccessarily  bad money.  It says veterans to bolster the young core.

Just now, NBASupes said:

I mentioned this offer months ago from Minny perspective. 

you did.

[NBASupes]

17 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

@NBASupes

 

Does Culver and #17  get you to #6?

We aren't trading Jrue for #6 unless he picks up his option and is willing to extend

We aren't trading #6 for Hayward plus picks - so that's a non starter.

 

If Atlanta accept it, yes. In general, you know the answer. Hell No!

[NBASupes]

If we made that trade it would only confirm what my guy said we were targeting months ago. More Wings! 

[BangHolman]

Travis always like Culver. He'd complete his 2019 Wing Trifecta. 

[ShooterSays]

The Minny rumor is weird to me. I'd be losing my mind if we were offering up Hunter or Reddish in trade packages to move up into the top 5. And they're offering him for 6? These 3 guys were pretty much in the same tier going into last year's draft.

[GThawks3]

5 minutes ago, ShooterSays said:

The Minny rumor is weird to me. I'd be losing my mind if we were offering up Hunter or Reddish in trade packages to move up into the top 5. And they're offering him for 6? These 3 guys were pretty much in the same tier going into last year's draft.

Culver shot under 30% from 3 & 46.2% from the FT line. Not many wings let alone good wings in the nba struggle that bad from the line. Reddish was at 80.2% and Hunter at 76.4% in comparison. For a guy that had shot concerns coming out of the draft....his value isn’t close to the 6th pick. 

Edited November 11, 2020 by GThawks3

[ShooterSays]

1 minute ago, GThawks3 said:

Culver shot under 30% from 3 & 46.2% from the FT line. Not many wings let alone good wings in the nba struggle that bad from the line. For a guy that had shot concerns coming in....his value isn’t close to the 6th pick. 

Exactly. I'd stay away from this if I was Travis.

[mrhonline]

Like Reddish, Culver's perimeter shooting improved as the season progressed.  But that FT%...whew.

[georgia]

I may be in the minority.   I’d do the deal for Culver.   His numbers aren’t far off from Reddish.  Plus 17 and I’d even see about adding Layman to the deal (another shooter)

[capstone21]

I am interested in Culver but not for 6 ... I think there is as much potential for him as most other rookies from last season

[Sothron]

Culver's raw numbers don't tell the story of his rookie season. He got moved to several positions. He had some games where you can definitely see the talent and potential. He also had games where he looked really bad out there. 

His FT percentage is so bad that it is mind boggling. 

I wouldn't want him on our team. We have enough wings that need minutes to grow as it is.

[kg01]

As someone who considered the idea of us taking Culver at 4 last year .... what?  I'm Mr. 2021, not Mr. 2020 ... I must say this supposed/proposed deal with MIN to move down is the heights of absurdity.

Actually *cough* *cough* *wheeze* there's so much smoke around that screen I'm hackin' up a lung over here.

Of course MIN is "in talks" with us about moving up.  Surely we're not entertaining that nonsense.  That dude's probably in danger of MIN choosing now to deny his rookie contract team option year.  But he gets you from 17 to 6?  Really, Minnesota?

[kg01]

6 minutes ago, Sothron said:

I wouldn't want him on our team. We have enough wings that need minutes to grow as it is.

"Our"?  He's already on "your" team.

ETA: C'mon, saphron.  Laugh.  You know it was funny.

Edited November 11, 2020 by kg01