Gimpy wrote:I don't want to trade back. Take the guy you want at three. Trading back rarely works out in the NBA draft (Kevin Love is the famous example of it being a home run, but it's usually not good).

If Parker is there at 3, the Jazz would be prime candidates to trade with, but what do they have to offer? 3 and 55 for 5, 23 and 35?

PTOITWCFTPP wrote:

BigEd76 wrote:I missed this cause I was on here, but DOC was confused by #10

That's pretty much what i did because I thought they still put the original teams logo on there.

yeah me too

choco wrote:

Gimpy wrote:I don't want to trade back. Take the guy you want at three. Trading back rarely works out in the NBA draft (Kevin Love is the famous example of it being a home run, but it's usually not good).

If Parker is there at 3, the Jazz would be prime candidates to trade with, but what do they have to offer? 3 and 55 for 5, 23 and 35?

That would not make me happy. We don't need more picks in this draft. If we go from 3 to 5 (which I still wouldn't want to do), I'd demand an unprotected first next year.

yeah, even though I knew it was impossible for the sixers to get 10, my heart raced for a second

Gimpy wrote:

choco wrote:

Gimpy wrote:I don't want to trade back. Take the guy you want at three. Trading back rarely works out in the NBA draft (Kevin Love is the famous example of it being a home run, but it's usually not good).

If Parker is there at 3, the Jazz would be prime candidates to trade with, but what do they have to offer? 3 and 55 for 5, 23 and 35?

That would not make me happy. We don't need more picks in this draft. If we go from 3 to 5 (which I still wouldn't want to do), I'd demand an unprotected first next year.

Yea this isn't the NFL. I'm not trading down any slots without first round picks coming back

JUburton wrote:yeah, even though I knew it was impossible for the sixers to get 10, my heart raced for a second

Gotta look at the small letters under logo...something about Pelicans

Gimpy wrote:

choco wrote:

Gimpy wrote:I don't want to trade back. Take the guy you want at three. Trading back rarely works out in the NBA draft (Kevin Love is the famous example of it being a home run, but it's usually not good).

If Parker is there at 3, the Jazz would be prime candidates to trade with, but what do they have to offer? 3 and 55 for 5, 23 and 35?

That would not make me happy. We don't need more picks in this draft. If we go from 3 to 5 (which I still wouldn't want to do), I'd demand an unprotected first next year.

Sorry, I meant to respond to JFL. I'm not looking to trade back either unless Hinkie believes Vonleh is straight up better than Parker anyway and you might as well try to get more value if you can. Maybe you can package 23 and some 2nds later on to move up into the teens.

PTOITWCFTPP wrote:

Gimpy wrote:

choco wrote:

Gimpy wrote:I don't want to trade back. Take the guy you want at three. Trading back rarely works out in the NBA draft (Kevin Love is the famous example of it being a home run, but it's usually not good).

If Parker is there at 3, the Jazz would be prime candidates to trade with, but what do they have to offer? 3 and 55 for 5, 23 and 35?

That would not make me happy. We don't need more picks in this draft. If we go from 3 to 5 (which I still wouldn't want to do), I'd demand an unprotected first next year.

Yea this isn't the NFL. I'm not trading down any slots without first round picks coming back

23 is a 1st?

actually it's practically a 2nd

I'd be pretty apprehensive if I didn't have full fledged faith in hinks.

wwry wrote:

Simmons is awesome.

choco wrote:

PTOITWCFTPP wrote:

Gimpy wrote:

choco wrote:

Gimpy wrote:I don't want to trade back. Take the guy you want at three. Trading back rarely works out in the NBA draft (Kevin Love is the famous example of it being a home run, but it's usually not good).

If Parker is there at 3, the Jazz would be prime candidates to trade with, but what do they have to offer? 3 and 55 for 5, 23 and 35?

That would not make me happy. We don't need more picks in this draft. If we go from 3 to 5 (which I still wouldn't want to do), I'd demand an unprotected first next year.

Yea this isn't the NFL. I'm not trading down any slots without first round picks coming back

23 is a 1st?

Sorry unprotected firsts like gimpy said. Late lottery pick isn't even worth coming down 2 slots in this draft. So you roll the dice next year like we did with the Pelicans pick

Say the magic love whoever is there at 3, 4/12 for 3?

Honestly....I wouldn't get cute. I'd sit at 3 and take whichever of Embid, Parker or Wiggins gets to us. I

td11 wrote:actually it's practically a 2nd

Which is basically a 1st

Exactly.

Squire wrote:Honestly....I wouldn't get cute. I'd sit at 3 and take whichever of Embid, Parker or Wiggins gets to us. I

so i stopped at p17, but all that talk about the bucks chick...AND NOT ONE PIC???

Bucky wrote:so i stopped at p17, but all that talk about the bucks chick...AND NOT ONE PIC???

the internet is your friend http://bustedcoverage.com/2014/05/20/me ... ley-edens/

ReadingPhilly wrote:Say the magic love whoever is there at 3, 4/12 for 3?

I trust Hinkie to do the right thing there. Stay at 3 unless the guy the Magic like is different and you'd get the same guy at 4.