The Mega Super Rumor Thread (Part 2)

[JeffS17]

2 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Even if you convinced yourself he has 4 years left on his contract. He will just retire if you send him to where he doesn't want to go. 

Seems unlikely.... for all his faults, KD loves playing basketball.  It's his number 1, 2, and 3 priorities in life.  I cannot imagine a single reality where he says "nah" to $200M and retires.

[Peoriabird]

36 minutes ago, GameTime said:

Simmons and Murray will unleash some of the most vicious defense we have seen in decades. Guaranteed top 3 team in defense. And Trae alone makes us top 5-10 in offense.

Yeah also can't scoot/is a nut case/injured and cost $42 mil per year. Y'all understand economics at all?

[JayBirdHawk]

9 minutes ago, theheroatl said:

Knicks got their man.. They gonna be a FORCE in the play-in

 

 

 

Smells like tampering.  NYK will get fined and lose a 2nd roundpick.  The NBA has to decide if they lose the 'tampering' or impose really stiff fines.  Half ass measures with 2nd round picks is just for show.

[NBASupes]

1 minute ago, JeffS17 said:

Seems unlikely.... for all his faults, KD loves playing basketball.  It's his number 1, 2, and 3 priorities in life.  I cannot imagine a single reality where he says "nah" to $200M and retires.

He's still 34. 

[akay]

Are we gonna see a JC for Simmons trade today? 

Trae/Murray/Hunter/Simmons/Clint lineup is a pretty bad shooting situation, I hope there are other moves planned if do get Ben. 

Murray and Simmons can replace JC's rebounding/defensive responsibilities, but I'm not sure Nate has the creative offensive ability to maximize a non-traditional lineup like we'll potentially have.

1- Can shoot

2- Can poorly shoot

3- Can mediocrely shoot

4- lol

5-lol 

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, NBASupes said:

He's still 34. 

That's pretty old for a wing player

[akay]

2 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

He's still 34. 

I think KD will play as long as his body allows. The NBA is on a different level of competition than any other league, and guys like KD wanna be there as long as possible imo. Totally saying this based on nothing but KD's love of the game, but I can see him playing till 38-39 if he doesn't get injured again.

Not getting injured again is probably a decent bar to level though

[GameTime]

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by GameTime

[RandomFan]

This is regarding the Brunson signing. 

[RedDawg#8]

12 minutes ago, akay said:

Are we gonna see a JC for Simmons trade today? 

Trae/Murray/Hunter/Simmons/Clint lineup is a pretty bad shooting situation, I hope there are other moves planned if do get Ben. 

Murray and Simmons can replace JC's rebounding/defensive responsibilities, but I'm not sure Nate has the creative offensive ability to maximize a non-traditional lineup like we'll potentially have.

1- Can shoot

2- Can poorly shoot

3- Can mediocrely shoot

4- lol

5-lol 

I got you;

4- Won't shoot

5-Can't shoot

 

Just terrible, smh

[theheroatl]

 

LMAO

 

[EazyRoc]

51 minutes ago, Sothron said:

Source update:

We are engaging the Nets with talks over KD and also Simmons. Trae is pushing for either one to come to Atlanta. 

Lol why do we have such a hard on for Ben Simmons

[akay]

58 minutes ago, sturt said:

I didn't see it that way, but perhaps that's just more validation that we're on different planets.

Perhaps lol

58 minutes ago, sturt said:

It's not a projection at all. They did .621 over the course of the not-turned-upside-down 60 games, and .653 when you add-in the other not-turned-upside-down games of the Nate McMillan era.

They did do it, but you have to consider which teams we played and their injury/covid situation + all the other factors that you can't quantize. But sure, I do definitely agree John Collins is instrumental to winning us basketball games, no question there. I just question his true impact

 

1 hour ago, sturt said:

(a) Not much of a sample size there, but let's go with it. Did you know? 6 of those 7 wins came against sub-.500 teams? Pardon me if, for both reasons, I'm not impressed that one can draw any meaningful conclusion.

(b) This team went 21-14 (.600) in Real Hawks games w/ John prior to his injury (... and sorry, I can't discredit a guy for playing hurt, so whether it's to JC's good or bad, I'm not even looking at the w/l for those games he played with a Sta-Puff Marshmallow Man hand).

Fair enough, but it's the only sample we have. 

 

1 hour ago, sturt said:

That's not a statement one can make without backing it up with something more than self-authority

I mean, you can just look at who Trae's PnR partner is mostly. His role has definitely been reduced and that's why he's not averaging 20/10 right now. I'm sure there are stats to back this up, but im feeling lazy lol, ill give it to you.

1 hour ago, sturt said:

600 is one.

Another is that, it's one thing for me to be the only person who thought JC's injury pretty much would take us out of winning a first round series with the #1 or #2 seed... it's another for that to be the consensus of anyone who offered an opinion here at the time.

We all saw his value.

Apparently you didn't. And that's okay, but had you said "I think we're fine without him for the playoffs," I'm pretty certain you would have discovered yours was a minority opinion in a big way

And here is where I have issue. 

.600 is a TEAM stat. I want to see what measurable impact John had on that .600 number, and why it would be difficult to replicate his production.

The .600 number is not a basketball reason about John Collins value, and again, his being injured in the playoffs definitely took out of being able to win because it was compounded with Clint being out/injured. 

I really would like to see more numerical reasons or even anecdotal statements about John's game and it being difficult to replace. Currently you point to our record and this playoff series, but I don't thinks a good justification of Johns abilities. 

1 hour ago, sturt said:

I think on this one we might be talking past each other, and there may be some legitimate misunderstanding... I don't mean off-court chemistry, as it seems you've concluded, but rather, I'm speaking of on-court chemistry... that thing that makes Trae and John so so so smooth and exceptional as PnR mates, and on other occasions when Trae kicks it out to the corner to JC for a 3pt attempt. I can't speak as vividly for defensive rotations, but of course, familiarity with each other on defense counts for something. And John's become an average defensive asset to us, which is fine as long as you have other plus defensive assets around him. (That said, if you're going to replace John, at least make sure you're getting a plus defender.)

So... the kind of "chemistry" that actually has some direct impact on wins.

Ahh you're right, I thought you were referencing off court chemistry, apologies for that.

Trae definitely has good chemistry with John as a PnR partner, but that chemistry shouldn't be a blocker in trading John if we can field a replacement as good or better than him.

I am of the opinion Trae Young could run an elite PnR with any caliber big man, John just happens to be a good caliber big that benefits from Trae's abilities. Not diminishing John here, just saying Trae gives him a big boost, but I think Trae can replicate this production with anyone.

1 hour ago, sturt said:

I'm repeating myself now, so that's a sign that I've exhausted the topic and won't continue to pursue it... We cannot win without him anything meaningful. If you let him go, you must replace him with someone as good or better, or you risk neutralizing the possible gain achieved by flipping your 2nd string PF for a 1st string PG.

And to this last point, I am not worried about John being traded because Travis has said that he wants a starter level player for John at the very least. To me, John being traded is nothing to worry about, because anyone he gets traded for will be worth it.

If TS was gonna trade John for nothing, he would have done so a while ago, so him being replaced with someone as good or better is just a pre-requisite to having this discussion in my mind

Also, thank you for the response. I truly love discussing on the Squawk   

[akay]

2 minutes ago, EazyRoc said:

Lol why do we have such a hard on for Ben Simmons

Damn, wonder why one of the worst defensive teams in the league would want a DPOY candidate 

[ShooterSays]

Windhorst just said on ESPN MIA is probably impossible because 

1) The Simmons / Bam rule of them not being able to be on the same team
2) MIA has no one that BKN would probably even want

Also, PHO would be tough because the only package he sees BKN taking back involves Booker and PHO obviously isn't doing that.

[theheroatl]

3 minutes ago, ShooterSays said:

Windhorst just said on ESPN MIA is probably impossible because 

1) The Simmons / Bam rule of them not being able to be on the same team
2) MIA has no one that BKN would probably even want

Also, PHO would be tough because the only package he sees BKN taking back involves Booker and PHO obviously isn't doing that.

It's either Phoenix or Atlanta probably at this point unless a random team just dumps the boat on them like Wolves or Portland.

I promise you.. Ressler and Schlenk are going after KD. 

Edited June 30, 2022 by theheroatl

[akay]

1 minute ago, theheroatl said:

It's either Phoenix or Atlanta probably at this point unless a random team just dumps the boat on them like Wolves or Portland.

I don't think Phonix trades Booker, so I think they're probably out

[NBASupes]

If I had to choose, he's gonna end up in PHX. Brooklyn don't have no choice in this. 

[ShooterSays]

1 minute ago, theheroatl said:

It's either Phoenix or Atlanta probably at this point unless a random team just dumps the boat on them like Wolves or Portland.

I don't even want to speculate on ATL because I'm not going to get my hopes up lol

[JayBirdHawk]