Had a very interesting conversation with a former NBA exec last week... Those familiar with economic theory know that when too many of one good enter the market at the same time (a surplus), those good will decrease in value due to lack of demand. I think we could see a very interesting situation this offseason around the PG position, and I hope Neil is ready to capitalize... Wave 1 will happen at the draft: Markelle Fultz, Lonzo Ball, DeAaron Fox, Frank Nkitilina, Dennis Smith, Frank Jackson, and PJ Dozier all look like possible first round draft picks as PGs. Add to that Josh Jackson, Malik Monk, Jayson Tatum, Donnovan Mitchell and Josh Hart as all potential "lead guards"/point forwards/or projected ball-dominant players, and you've got quite a few entering the league. Wave 2 will hit with free agency: throw in Chris Paul, Kyle Lowry, Jrue Holliday, George Hill, Shaun Livingston, and Dion Waiters/Dwayne Wade (again ball-dominant/"lead guard" types) as free agents. Waive 2b/3 will be the effective fallout from any of the above changing rosters: what happens with Boston's young guards? What happens to Jordan Clarkson and/or De'Angelo Russell if they take Ball? Obviously it's impossible to know exactly what shakes out, but if I had to bet money on who will be the biggest "steal" of the offseason -- I'm betting a guy like George Hill ends up signing for cheap somewhere or a young prospect like Terry Rozier or Jordan Clarkson gets had for crumbs... I like Bazz and all, and I agree with those who feel that ET was brought in to stabilize the PG spot off the bench, but I'd love to see Neil get involved at the tail end of this cascade of PG prices. There's not enough prime PG real estate for all of these acquisitions...
You could very well be right on that theory but I don't think George Hill is the best example for it. He played well for the Jazz and even if they thought Exum could step up next year, I can't see them them not offering Hill a decent contract. He won't come cheap IMO. But that doesn't mean someone else might not fall through the cracks.
It will be interesting to see what happens if UTA loses Hayward. Last summer, there were rumors he wanted to be traded. Then UTA had a successful season. Hayward and Gobert both had their best seasons to date and Hill and Joe Johnson were good fits. But, if Hayward leaves what direction will they go? Without Hayward, does it make sense to offer the 31-year old Hill a big contract. I think Hill's fate is directly tied to Gordon Hayward. If Hayward stays in UTA, I think they offer Hill a good, but not huge, contract and he stays put. If Hayward leaves, I think they will let Hill walk, too. BNM
Ideally Hayward goes east to Boston. I say ideally because that should eliminate Boston from the Paul George scenarios and it makes the Jazz worse.
That would be perfect. The fewer serious bidders in the PG13 auction, the better our chances. If eBay was smart, they'd contract with the NBA to gather bids for players like PG13, Boogie Cousins, Carmelo Anthony back in his DEN days, etc. The "selling" team can set u a reserve "price" (you need to offer at least 3 1st round picks to be able to bid), block certain bidders, etc. Plus, weakening a division rival is always a good thing. BNM
Funny, I was talking about this today. Jrue Holiday is NOT "gonna get paid," for just the reasons you state. He's what the 25th or so best PG in the league with an influx of PGs?
I don't think Lakers will be able to play Ball and Russell together. Depending on how much they actually like Ball and think he can play straightaway they should either consider trading Russell. I think Philadelphia would give them their 2018 pick back but it would actually be them putting protection this time. Or they would just give them Okafor, it was supposed to be that way during draft anyway.
I've always liked J. Clarkson. Maybe not quite as much as the other J. Clarkson, but Top Gear sucks now, so any J. Clarkson is better than no J. Clarkson. That would be a good get if on a BBC-sized contract.
BTW, I'd love Holiday as a 3rd guard. 6'4, so he's big enough to play some SG. Good defender, can create for himself and others, and can hit 3s. Would play about 26min per game behind Dame and CJ, which would be perfect.
Why can't Russell be a SG? He only gets 6apg per 36, is a 6'5, score first guard, and has been more productive at SG. If they were to trade him they'd go for Butler IMO. They won't though.
My guess is Magic will love Ball's game. My guess is also that Magic hates Russell's game. As it is they moved D'Angelo over to the SG position last year because he did not play well at PG. If they get any decent offers for him they will move him in a second. It's not that he isn't talented it's just that I don't see him as a good teammate...on or off the floor. But he is still young so he could mature. Regardless I don't see him being a Laker for long. But who wants him?
