Realistic trade for Center

[BudweiserCeltic]

As an aside, I love threads that start with "Realistic".

Because Pachulia for Bass is considered unrealistic?

Because pretty much everyone who makes trade ideas threads consider them "realistic", so it's funny one finds the need to state that "now MY idea is realistic".

It's a pointless exercise.

[Joe Green]

As an aside, I love threads that start with "Realistic".

Because Pachulia for Bass is considered unrealistic?

Hey Eddie, TNX for sticking up to my post (;

I don't know if either team would do this trade, but I was trying to suggest something plausible. I love a good conversation, but I get disappointing when I read a trade where we dump expiring contracts for an up and coming big man (ala Steve Adams)

[Joe Green]

As an aside, I love threads that start with "Realistic".

Because Pachulia for Bass is considered unrealistic?

Because pretty much everyone who makes trade ideas threads consider them "realistic", so it's funny one finds the need to state that "now MY idea is realistic".

It's a pointless exercise.

Well, if you feel it is pointless, why bother posting?

It's armchair GMing.... Its fun when it gives you something to think about and analyze. Its not as much fun if the trades suggested are too lopsided (i.e. why don't we trade Wallace for Anthony Davis, heard he is pretty good...)

[BudweiserCeltic]

As an aside, I love threads that start with "Realistic".

Because Pachulia for Bass is considered unrealistic?

Because pretty much everyone who makes trade ideas threads consider them "realistic", so it's funny one finds the need to state that "now MY idea is realistic".

It's a pointless exercise.

Well, if you feel it is pointless, why bother posting?

It's armchair GMing.... Its fun when it gives you something to think about and analyze. Its not as much fun if the trades suggested are too lopsided (i.e. why don't we trade Wallace for Anthony Davis, heard he is pretty good...)

I'm just saying that indicating in the thread title that your thread is THE realistic one, as opposed to the rest of the numerous trade ideas is pointless. It oversells your opinion. All ideas are "realistic" until they aren't.

So in all, I really get a kick of all threads that find the need to let us now in the thread title that your opinion is the realistic one.

[Celtics4ever]

It's the "fit". Kanter and Favors have not meshed together. Sullinger would start at the 4 and provide better spacing. How is replacing Kanter with Sullinger hurting their "bench"?

Actually, it would hurt ours,   Sully has been largely our most consistent player in the preseason.   Right now he is helping our floor spreading.  Sully is a better passer too.  This makes zero basketball sense for us.

Why would be trade our best player for a guy who has worse stats and is not a solid rim protector? Kanter averaged .5 BPG.   Sully averaged .7 BPG.   Sully scores more and rebounds more as well.

This may "fit" for Utah but it would be like us as grown men trying to fit in child shoes for us.  Helps Utah but I think it is a dud for us. 

Getting a center would help us, but he should be better than what we are already flooring or not take away an asset to make us worse.     Sully for Kanter does just that.

[ballin]

The Jazz make for an interesting trade parter, as they have Favors, Kanter, and Gobbert. Kanter and Favors struggle on the floor together. While Gobbert has been impressive so far. Last night he had 11 pts and 20 reb in 22 minutes.

Sullinger for Kanter or Gobert makes for an interesting swap. Sullinger can provide better floor spacing for Favors and is childhood friends with Trey Burke. Kanter or Gobbert provide us with better size inside and removes a bit of the logjam we have the 4 with Olynyk, Bass, and Green set to receive minutes there.

No way in a million years that the Jazz give up Gobert at this point. He has way too much potential as an elite shot blocker and rebounder, the sort of player that every team would kill to have. And even though it's preseason, the dude just recorded 20 rebounds in 21 minutes... I mean, whatttttt??

The Jazz are thinking they just stumbled onto gold, so I doubt anybody could lure him out of their hands until they've at least seen what he can do for a year or two.

[Eddie20]

It's the "fit". Kanter and Favors have not meshed together. Sullinger would start at the 4 and provide better spacing. How is replacing Kanter with Sullinger hurting their "bench"?

Actually, it would hurt ours,   Sully has been largely our most consistent player in the preseason.   Right now he is helping our floor spreading.  Sully is a better passer too.  This makes zero basketball sense for us.

Why would be trade our best player for a guy who has worse stats and is not a solid rim protector? Kanter averaged .5 BPG.   Sully averaged .7 BPG.   Sully scores more and rebounds more as well.

This may "fit" for Utah but it would be like us as grown men trying to fit in child shoes for us.  Helps Utah but I think it is a dud for us. 

Getting a center would help us, but he should be better than what we are already flooring or not take away an asset to make us worse.     Sully for Kanter does just that.

How exactly would this trade make us worse?

mpg Kanter  26.7 - Sullinger  27.6
ppg Kanter 12.3 - Sullinger 13.3
FG% Kanter 49.1 - Sullinger 42.7
rpg Kanter 7.5 - Sullinger 8.1
age Kanter 22 - Sullinger 22
height Kanter 6' 11.25" - Sullinger 6' 9"
wingspan Kanter 7' 1.5" - Sullinger 7' 1.25"
standing reach Kanter 9' 1.5" - Sullinger 8' 9.5"

The numbers across the board are very similar, save for Kanter's FG% and his height and reach measurements. Kanter also doesn't have the injury risk like Sullinger (back). Sullinger is a better passer and shooter, but Olynyk excels at these same things and plays the same position.

You've been a little inconsistent with your thoughts on this topic. So much so that I wonder if there are multiple users on your account.

You wrote this less than 2 hrs after you posted the above.

Kanter is going nowhere.  He averages 12 PPG and 7 RPG,   You can play three bigs in the NBA as you need a group of players who play when your starters are tired called "bench".

[Evantime34]

I think two guys to target at Center are Kanter and Mozgov. I would not however give up Sullinger for either of those.

[Celtics4ever]

How exactly would this trade make us worse?

mpg Kanter  26.7 - Sullinger  27.6
ppg Kanter 12.3 - Sullinger 13.3
FG% Kanter 49.1 - Sullinger 42.7
rpg Kanter 7.5 - Sullinger 8.1
age Kanter 22 - Sullinger 22
height Kanter 6' 11.25" - Sullinger 6' 9"
wingspan Kanter 7' 1.5" - Sullinger 7' 1.25"
standing reach Kanter 9' 1.5" - Sullinger 8' 9.5"

Kanter is not a great leaper.  Sully can jump higher and almost has the same measurements in reach and wingspan.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Enes-Kanter-5168/

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Jared-Sullinger-5029/

Much rebounding is done without steps in the NBA.  Kanter is 26" and Sully is 29.5" given the stats you list above where their reach is equal, thanks for making my point for me.

Kanter does have size and shoot better last year but I would wager, Sully takes a step forward this year.   I think Kanter will be a tall Turk the same that he always has been.  He is unathletic  and Gobert has outplayed him.   I think Sully would be giving too much for him, plain and simple.  Sully is a starter for us, Kanter would not be, I'd wager.

http://stats.nba.com/playerProfile.html?PlayerID=202683

http://stats.nba.com/playerProfile.html?PlayerID=203096

>   
And when one value is bigger than another
we use a "greater than" sign

Sully >  PPG
Sully > RPG

Higher numbers are better,   those are last years stats you posted.   Look at the preaseason stats  and compare this year.   Sully is top ten, PFs, something I can't say for Kanters who  is not top 25 for PF or C.    He is 27 to Sully's 10th.   Sully is averaging almost 4 more PPG with one more MPG !   Sully is also shooting  .523 this year from the field to Kanter's  .438.   That is how it makes us worse!  This are stats this year and this season.

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/preseason/stats/2015/Totals/All/points/PF/desc/1/Preseason

I get he is taller and the Jazz out of their rotation.  But he is not a good or great player.   I think we could get him for much less than Sullinger and still be a better team with Jared here.

[Eddie20]

How exactly would this trade make us worse?

mpg Kanter  26.7 - Sullinger  27.6
ppg Kanter 12.3 - Sullinger 13.3
FG% Kanter 49.1 - Sullinger 42.7
rpg Kanter 7.5 - Sullinger 8.1
age Kanter 22 - Sullinger 22
height Kanter 6' 11.25" - Sullinger 6' 9"
wingspan Kanter 7' 1.5" - Sullinger 7' 1.25"
standing reach Kanter 9' 1.5" - Sullinger 8' 9.5"

Kanter is not a great leaper.  Sully can jump higher and almost has the same measurements in reach and wingspan.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Enes-Kanter-5168/

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Jared-Sullinger-5029/

Much rebounding is done without steps in the NBA.  Kanter is 26" and Sully is 29.5" given the stats you list above where their reach is equal, thanks for making my point for me.

Kanter does have size and shoot better last year but I would wager, Sully takes a step forward this year.   I think Kanter will be a tall Turk the same that he always has been.  He is unathletic  and Gobert has outplayed him.   I think Sully would be giving too much for him, plain and simple.  Sully is a starter for us, Kanter would not be, I'd wager.

http://stats.nba.com/playerProfile.html?PlayerID=202683

http://stats.nba.com/playerProfile.html?PlayerID=203096

>   
And when one value is bigger than another
we use a "greater than" sign

Sully >  PPG
Sully > RPG

Higher numbers are better,   those are last years stats you posted.   Look at the preaseason stats  and compare this year.   Sully is top ten, PFs, something I can't say for Kanters who  is not top 25 for PF or C.    He is 27 to Sully's 10th.   Sully is averaging almost 4 more PPG with one more MPG !   Sully is also shooting  .523 this year from the field to Kanter's  .438.   That is how it makes us worse!  This are stats this year and this season.

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/preseason/stats/2015/Totals/All/points/PF/desc/1/Preseason

I get he is taller and the Jazz out of their rotation.  But he is not a good or great player.   I think we could get him for much less than Sullinger and still be a better team with Jared here.

I don't think I've established your point. On the contrary you've sort of established mine by stating that their numbers are comparable yet we need a center and have a very capable PF in Olynyk.

I also wouldn't use Sullingers PPG as better than Kanter's when the numbers were virtually identical, but Kanter shot much better.

If you're so down on Kanter why did you say "he's going nowhere"?

[aingeforthree]

With Zeller struggling and Vitor nursing his ailing knee (with Vodka...) we seem to all be aware how painfully the Cs need a C....

In fact, I would say we may be a decent center away from being a respectable team in the East. Unfortunately, teams are not lining up to hand over their defensive anchor centers ([dang], we should have gotten Asik...)

I therefore suggest a straight up trade with the Bucks - Bass for Zaza Pachulia.

While Zaza is not our center of the future, he is a real Center, stands  6"11 240, is a veteran and still only 30. He is a very decent rebounder (around 9 rebounds per 36) with a knack for offensive boards and an underrated passer at 2.5 assists per 36.

The bucks are stacked with Sanders, Henson and Gianis all at 6"11 with huge wingspans and youth and have no need for Zaza's 2 year contract. Bass would save them money and actually fills a need covering 3&4 position defensively. Since they are in full youth mode, they may even throw in a 2nd rounder for the financial relief of this trade.

Your thoughts?

Interesting idea.  I personally don't buy that the Bucks are dedicating themselves to Larry Sanders.  I think if anybody is available on that roster, it's him.  Zaza stays put if I'm guessing. With Sanders, he's been a thorn in their side and maybe Kidd talks them into keeping him because he's talented as heck, but that's the only way he stays IMO.  This kid is not all there and they have a ton of money locked up in someone that could be a couple off the court issues away from disaster.

Would Ainge pull the trigger ?  That's the biggest question.  Is he willing to sacrifice assets for a player whose on the verge of self destruction ?  Would he chance it ?

[chambers]

I like the idea, and I understand the want for a center- but I'd rather play Zeller and let him grow into NBA starter minutes than get our hands on a veteran.

Pachulia would be great for the locker room, and would bring some much needed 'toughness'- but he's past his prime and at this stage we are rebuilding. There is simply no need to let Zeller and KO lose minutes on the floor so we can win a few more games- it's pointless to me.

I'm not a huge fan of Kanter either, he hasn't quite panned out and he's got a long way before being declared a 'bust' of any kind, but he's just not defensively orientated enough to put next to Sullinger or Olynyk.

Gobert would be my choice, but I wouldn't give up Sullinger for him.
I'd give up James Young+a late first rounder but I doubt the Jazz would think that's enough.

Nice idea though. I think if we'd had Kevin Love and were trying to convince him to stay/win as many games as possible, then Pachulia would be a nice swap for someone like Bass- but we aren't as focused on winning as we are on developing these young players properly- and we need to give them as much court time as possible, something that Pachulia takes away if he is put on this squad.

[biggs]

As an aside, I love threads that start with "Realistic".

Because Pachulia for Bass is considered unrealistic?

I know he's not a big man but while we're talking about realistic targets what do you guys think about Earl Clark?

[greg683x]

As an aside, I love threads that start with "Realistic".

Because Pachulia for Bass is considered unrealistic?

Because pretty much everyone who makes trade ideas threads consider them "realistic", so it's funny one finds the need to state that "now MY idea is realistic".

It's a pointless exercise.

so then chuckle and move on with your life.  why do you have to go out of your way to make a post just to make him feel like a schmuck?   

it wasnt some terrible proposal that reeked to be made an example of. 

[BudweiserCeltic]

As an aside, I love threads that start with "Realistic".

Because Pachulia for Bass is considered unrealistic?

Because pretty much everyone who makes trade ideas threads consider them "realistic", so it's funny one finds the need to state that "now MY idea is realistic".

It's a pointless exercise.

so then chuckle and move on with your life.  why do you have to go out of your way to make a post just to make him feel like a schmuck?   

it wasnt some terrible proposal that reeked to be made an example of. 

I had moved on, but then you had to come back and address the post once again, so now we're back at it again... needlessly. Have I made any comment on his trade proposal whether good or bad?

It was a quick, simple one sentence observation on the nature of the need to use "Realistic" in a title of an opinion based thread of any kind (whether the idea is good or bad is unimportant), nothing more, and nothing less, which you guys want to make into a bigger deal than it is. If you want to draw more attention to it, be my guest.

Is this trade realistic? Good? Maybe, maybe not... worth considering of course. Would I do it? No because I don't want Pachulia's contract lowering our buying power next year. Bass's contract is more valuable than that. There, how's that for an answer... on-topic.