Trade from ESPN's 5 on 5

[PosImpos]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-120131/nba-dwight-howard-trade-machine-thoughts


I didn't like most of their proposals, but I thought the idea of Golden State finally trading Monta Ellis for Danny Granger made a lot of sense.

The Pacers could use a go-to scorer, I think, and right now George and Granger are kind of an awkward combo on the wing, since both are rightly small forwards.  Golden State has an even worse situation in their backcourt with Curry and Ellis. 

I think both Granger and Ellis would be a lot more effective if they swapped teams.

[byennie]

This is on of the better, simpler original trades I've seen lately. Makes sense for both teams, money is even, etc.

I also still think Rondo for Nash makes sense, except I'd want their lottery pick as well, and I'd want it to be looking solidly top-6 or so by then... which obviously changes the trade a bit.

[jambr380]

This is on of the better, simpler original trades I've seen lately. Makes sense for both teams, money is even, etc.

I also still think Rondo for Nash makes sense, except I'd want their lottery pick as well, and I'd want it to be looking solidly top-6 or so by then... which obviously changes the trade a bit.

I never quite understood the Rondo for Nash trade ideas. People always jump down posters' throats when they create threads using Ray or KG as a key component in landing a young, budding star; however, isn't this the same thing in reverse? Nash has had a fantastic NBA career, but I would much rather watch Rondo in his prime for the next 10+ years.

I get that you have included the Phoenix lottery pick, which obviously changes things. This isn't directed at you, just the idea.

As for the Granger for Monta deal - I guess it makes sense, especially for Indiana.

[byennie]

I never quite understood the Rondo for Nash trade ideas. People always jump down poster's throats when they create threads using Ray or KG as a key component in landing a young, budding star; however, isn't this the same thing in reverse? Nash has had a fantastic NBA career, but I would much rather watch Rondo in his prime for the next 10+ years.

I get that you have included the Phoenix lottery pick, which obviously changes things. This isn't directed at you, just the idea.

As for the Granger for Monta deal - I guess it makes sense, especially for Indiana.

I'm not entirely sure I'd do it either, but in theory it would also free up enough money to sign Deron Williams as our Rondo replacement next year, and possibly even Deron + Howard to go with a high lottery pick.

It would be bold and risky... I kind of wish we had an option as straighforward as the Granger / Ellis deal.

[jambr380]

I never quite understood the Rondo for Nash trade ideas. People always jump down posters' throats when they create threads using Ray or KG as a key component in landing a young, budding star; however, isn't this the same thing in reverse? Nash has had a fantastic NBA career, but I would much rather watch Rondo in his prime for the next 10+ years.

I get that you have included the Phoenix lottery pick, which obviously changes things. This isn't directed at you, just the idea.

As for the Granger for Monta deal - I guess it makes sense, especially for Indiana.

I'm not entirely sure I'd do it either, but in theory it would also free up enough money to sign Deron Williams as our Rondo replacement next year, and possibly even Deron + Howard to go with a high lottery pick.

It would be bold and risky... I kind of wish we had an option as straighforward as the Granger / Ellis deal.

I think it makes more sense to deal Rondo for a Paul George type of player (not my idea - in another thread a couple of days ago). That way you really save money and can guarantee enough money to sign Howard and Deron and bring back a great piece for the future. I am not saying it has to be George, it could be any potential star still on a rookie salary, but it seems to make more sense than just dealing him for cap space this offseason. Rondo seems to be worth more than that.

[European NBA fan]

This is on of the better, simpler original trades I've seen lately. Makes sense for both teams, money is even, etc.

I also still think Rondo for Nash makes sense, except I'd want their lottery pick as well, and I'd want it to be looking solidly top-6 or so by then... which obviously changes the trade a bit.

With the talent in the 2012 draft, the Suns would be crazy to do any deal involving their pick. Their rebuilding starts with that pick, not with Rondo.

[Who]

Indiana would have an even more dysfunctional backcourt than GSW do with D.Collison and M.Ellis together. They wouldn't be able to get away with Ellis at PG either. They don't have the personnel.

Golden State would improve considerably. Granger slides in at SF, Dorell slides down to SG and Steph Curry finally gets out from Monta's shadow and ball-dominating ways.

Lousy trade for Indiana that hurts them considerably and great trade for GSW which improves them in a major way.

[Moranis]

This is on of the better, simpler original trades I've seen lately. Makes sense for both teams, money is even, etc.

I also still think Rondo for Nash makes sense, except I'd want their lottery pick as well, and I'd want it to be looking solidly top-6 or so by then... which obviously changes the trade a bit.

With the talent in the 2012 draft, the Suns would be crazy to do any deal involving their pick. Their rebuilding starts with that pick, not with Rondo.

I agree, but I also think they will try to move Nash to pick up more pieces for the future because at this point they aren't contending and Nash probably wants to play for a contender.

[PosImpos]

Indiana would have an even more dysfunctional backcourt than GSW do with D.Collison and M.Ellis together. They wouldn't be able to get away with Ellis at PG either. They don't have the personnel.

Golden State would improve considerably. Granger slides in at SF, Dorell slides down to SG and Steph Curry finally gets out from Monta's shadow and ball-dominating ways.

Lousy trade for Indiana that hurts them considerably and great trade for GSW which improves them in a major way.

I feel like they could start George Hill and bring Collison off the bench as the backup point.  Hill would be a good fit playing beside Monta. 

Indeed, they could trade Collison for a better combo guard to play off the ball with Monta, if they needed to.

[greenpride32]

I never quite understood the Rondo for Nash trade ideas. People always jump down posters' throats when they create threads using Ray or KG as a key component in landing a young, budding star; however, isn't this the same thing in reverse? Nash has had a fantastic NBA career, but I would much rather watch Rondo in his prime for the next 10+ years.

Rondo is already in his 6th year in the NBA.  After all that time if he hasn't "budded" into a superstar he's probably not going to.  What you see is what you get.  I think the C's management also feels he doesn't have the personality to be a team leader.  He can lead on the court by example, but that's it. 

[Fafnir]

Its tough to have a functional offense with your highest assist rate being the 26.9% of Darren Collison.

Monta at PG would be their best passer, but he's not that much better than Collison and playing them together wouldn't work very well.

[drax]

Rondo is already in his 6th year in the NBA.  After all that time if he hasn't "budded" into a superstar he's probably not going to.  What you see is what you get.  I think the C's management also feels he doesn't have the personality to be a team leader.  He can lead on the court by example, but that's it. 

Leader on the court sounds great to me. As long as the big three are in Boston no other player can become the new "leader". Do you think a CP3, Williams or DH would instant be that leader? I highly doubt that. They give the team more star power of course but leadership when you have PP or KG?

[PosImpos]

Its tough to have a functional offense with your highest assist rate being the 26.9% of Darren Collison.

Monta at PG would be their best passer, but he's not that much better than Collison and playing them together wouldn't work very well.

Is it really that much different than a backcourt of Collison and George?  Neither is really a playmaker.

I think it's not out of the question that Monta might pass the ball a little bit more if he were on a team with some more offensive weapons (instead of just Curry and Lee).

[Fafnir]

Its tough to have a functional offense with your highest assist rate being the 26.9% of Darren Collison.

Monta at PG would be their best passer, but he's not that much better than Collison and playing them together wouldn't work very well.

Is it really that much different than a backcourt of Collison and George?  Neither is really a playmaker.

It isn't which is why this trade wouldn't be a good one for the Pacers. Why move Granger for Monta if it doesn't improve your offense?

All you're doing is traded a potential positional issue at your roster at the wing to the PG/SG position.

[PosImpos]

Its tough to have a functional offense with your highest assist rate being the 26.9% of Darren Collison.

Monta at PG would be their best passer, but he's not that much better than Collison and playing them together wouldn't work very well.

Is it really that much different than a backcourt of Collison and George?  Neither is really a playmaker.

It isn't which is why this trade wouldn't be a good one for the Pacers. Why move Granger for Monta if it doesn't improve your offense?

All you're doing is traded a potential positional issue at your roster at the wing to the PG/SG position.

I guess I think that Monta in the backcourt with George on the wing is more reconcilable moving forward than Collison and George in the backcourt with Granger on the wing.

Maybe it means moving Collison or moving George Hill into the starting lineup, but I think it could result in the Pacers being better.

I think the main idea behind the trade idea was that what the Pacers are lacking right now is a guy they can give the ball to and say "we need a basket right now -- get a basket." 

Granger has been that sort of player in the past, and maybe he's just been kind of out of shape so far.  But it probably makes more sense for them to have that kind of player at pg/sg rather than at SF, because George and Granger are such similar players.