Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Bobcats in Dwight Howard's Trade Talk.


Recommended Posts

No not for Dwight.

"Magic and Nets are working to facilitate a 4 team deal with the Clippers and either Cavs or Bobcats, ESPN's Ric Bucher reports.

In discussed deal, Nets would receive Howard and other players. Magic would get C Brook Lopez, three 1st rounders and other players. Cavaliers and Bobcats are both interested in F Kris Humphries, while Bobcats and Clippers are interested in G MarShon Brooks. " (ESPN)

Interesting news! Would love to add either Humphries or Brooks. Would be amazing depth and key pieces we could build around toward the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MarShon Brooks' 2012 Stats:

12.6 PPG, 3.60 RPG, 2.3. APG

Marshon Brooks would be good added depth behind DJ, Kemba, Gordon, and Hendo. In 2012 we could look for a big man instead of adding another scorer.

Kris Humphries' 2012 Stats:

13.8 PPG, 11.00 RPG, 1.5 APG

Humphries will definitely be able to solidify that PF position, giving Bismack the opportunity to play Center. Also complementing each other perfectly and our front court should have no problem rebounding. In 2012, we could then take a Shabazz Muhammad instead of a big man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happened to the NBA competition rules? One team resigning Gerald Wallace and Derron Williams and adding Joe Johnson and Dwight Howard in free agency would be a bit much, no?

How is that any different than the Lakers adding Chris Paul?

That team would be the "BROOKLYN Nets", so Stern wouldn't care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this trade gos through as constructed it just shows how crooked the league is. So your telling me the Magic are getting fair value trading a HOF center for Luke Walton, Brook Lopez on a max deal, and 3 late first rounders. Lakers being another team after D12 aside, this trade sucks for the magic and for it to even be on the table reeks of foul play. Hell, it could be argue that Cleveland is getting a better deal then the Magic.

Commence your "look at the whiny Lakers fan" comments now....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im hoping a deal gets done with us being in the mix!!!

BUT, I am hoping it's a trade through players only and not us giving up future draft picks. And I'm sure Cho is smart enough to not give up picks. Maybe parting ways with Thomas and Hendo.

I would really like for us to add Humphries, though I wouldnt care if it was Brooks. But Humphries just makes more sense for us. He's a big body that we lack. Humphries and Bismack would be a really nice front court. Also giving us the opportunity to take Shabazz next year.

Imagine:

PG: Kemba

SG: Shabazz / Gordon

SF: MKG / Taylor

PF: Humphries

C: Bismack / Mullens

I smell a playoffs push in 2013-2014 .

When Cho was talking about rebuilding. He didn't mean hitting the lottery drafts every year. He meant two or three drafts only (which we had 2011/2012; and next year 2013) and using trades like this to set us up into the future of brightness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is Brooklyn doing anything wrong here? They traded for Derron, traded (and significantly overpaid) for Wallace, traded for Joe Johnson's contract (bigger than the player), and now they are trying to trade for Dwight. If anything they built their team more like the Celtics than the Heat

Obviously Dwight is the most significant piece and they certainly aren't trading fair value, but the Magic is about to get a hell of a lot more for Dwight than the Cavs got for Lebron.

Plus, that 2017 Nets 1st rounder could end up being a very nice pick- they are old

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • LOL... Yet again proving you can't look below anything than what you see on the surface Mock drafts ARE NOT draft grades They are what people think will happen.  They are mocking teams taking QB's in the top 5 of the draft because that's just historically how drafts go regardless of the grades on the QBs.  Almost every draft expert, even those mocking QB's going high, have said time and time again that none of these QB's actually grade out as those type of picks. This is again, where I say you don't like to actually read what I have to say, because I already explained it. 2022 the exact same thing happened, mock drafts had guys like Pickett and Willis going in the Top 5 because that's just what teams usually do, but GM's listened to their prospect grades and knew they weren't worth taking that high, so they didn't. It's not to say QB's won't go that high this year, but it's to say that they aren't graded out as elite QB prospects.  Mock drafts 
    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
×
×
  • Create New...