This topic contains 28 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by negguary 9 years, 10 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
- Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 3:53am #56074
KidBParticipantThere’s been sources that said that, in addition to the Sixers desire to get Wiggins, they’re also planning on getting Exum at the same time. Just wanna throw this trade proposal out there and see if anyone here will agree with it:
Sixers trade MCW and #10 to Orlando for #4.
Sixers get: Wiggins (if he slips to 3, as some beat writers have also predicted), and Dante Exum with #4.
Orlando now has: MCW, #10, and #12.
Now, Orlando can have a great backcourt going forward, plus two more lottery picks that they can use in anyway they want. Both teams get what they want. And everybody’s happy !
Now, again, this might have to be done on the day of the draft (not before then) to allow Sam Hinkie to see iF Wiggins will fall to 3 or not.
If this has already been proposed before, then I apologize.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:13am #914176
KidBParticipantNext season possible Sixers lineup:
* Chandler Parsons (PF )
* Thad Young ( SF )
* Nerlens Noel ( C )
* Andrew Wiggins ( SG )
* Dante Exum ( PG )
I don’t know about others, but this is a starting lineup that I’m really hyped about.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:13am #914044
KidBParticipantNext season possible Sixers lineup:
* Chandler Parsons (PF )
* Thad Young ( SF )
* Nerlens Noel ( C )
* Andrew Wiggins ( SG )
* Dante Exum ( PG )
I don’t know about others, but this is a starting lineup that I’m really hyped about.
0- Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 5:28am #914232
Ebown5ParticipantFirst off, Thad is a power forward period. Just because he can hit the 3 a little bit and he is undersized doesn’t make him a 3. He hasn’t played the 3 in years and shouldn’t in the future. He can defend the 3, but he can’t play it on offense.
Signing Chandler Parsons would take a huge deal and he is not a star player. There is no reason to put 10+ million a year into anyone right now that isnt a star. We stink and need to continue to stink for a while. If we were to make the playoffs next year we would send our first round pick to the Celtics and that is the last thing that we want to do.
Also, and this isn’t specifically addressed to you as people do it all of the time, but it is a personal pet peeve of mine when posters layout potential starting lineups in their posts as if we are too stupid to understand what the lineup would be given the idea presented.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 5:28am #914099
Ebown5ParticipantFirst off, Thad is a power forward period. Just because he can hit the 3 a little bit and he is undersized doesn’t make him a 3. He hasn’t played the 3 in years and shouldn’t in the future. He can defend the 3, but he can’t play it on offense.
Signing Chandler Parsons would take a huge deal and he is not a star player. There is no reason to put 10+ million a year into anyone right now that isnt a star. We stink and need to continue to stink for a while. If we were to make the playoffs next year we would send our first round pick to the Celtics and that is the last thing that we want to do.
Also, and this isn’t specifically addressed to you as people do it all of the time, but it is a personal pet peeve of mine when posters layout potential starting lineups in their posts as if we are too stupid to understand what the lineup would be given the idea presented.
0
- Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:15am #914186
BubbaChuckParticipantFor some reason everyone’s assuming that Exum is better than MCW. The guy barely has a ressume of 4 games! I don’t know why the Sixers would give away both their rookie of the year & (!) a lottery pick for someone that plays the same style as MCW and isn’t even a good shooter?
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:15am #914054
BubbaChuckParticipantFor some reason everyone’s assuming that Exum is better than MCW. The guy barely has a ressume of 4 games! I don’t know why the Sixers would give away both their rookie of the year & (!) a lottery pick for someone that plays the same style as MCW and isn’t even a good shooter?
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:20am #914192
NardDog NationParticipantHow many times are you going to do this same exact thread, OP? I swear that I’ve seen this topic done on 2 other occassions.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:20am #914060
NardDog NationParticipantHow many times are you going to do this same exact thread, OP? I swear that I’ve seen this topic done on 2 other occassions.
0- Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:24am #914200
KidBParticipantWell, you saw wrong, dude. How would I have posted the same exact thread when the news just came out yesterday that they’re really interested now in getting both Wiggins and Exum ?
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:24am #914068
KidBParticipantWell, you saw wrong, dude. How would I have posted the same exact thread when the news just came out yesterday that they’re really interested now in getting both Wiggins and Exum ?
0- Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 5:31am #914242
NardDog NationParticipantThe topic has definitely been broached before but it wasn’t by you; another poster admitted to being responsible for the same topic. My apologies though.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 5:31am #914109
NardDog NationParticipantThe topic has definitely been broached before but it wasn’t by you; another poster admitted to being responsible for the same topic. My apologies though.
0
- Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:27am #914202
BallinmvpParticipantI don’t know if exum is better than MCW but I wouldn’t take the chance. I wouldn’t sneeze at MCW, Nerlens, Parker/Wiggins, and pick 10.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:27am #914070
BallinmvpParticipantI don’t know if exum is better than MCW but I wouldn’t take the chance. I wouldn’t sneeze at MCW, Nerlens, Parker/Wiggins, and pick 10.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:47am #914210
burgessfourParticipantI posted a similar thread I think last weekend – Noel & 10 for 4 & 12, under the premise "just for fun"
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 4:47am #914078
burgessfourParticipantI posted a similar thread I think last weekend – Noel & 10 for 4 & 12, under the premise "just for fun"
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 5:22am #914224
Ebown5ParticipantThe Sixers are not trading MCW for anyone because there is no need to do so. The only reason to draft Exum is if you believe that he can be a shooting guard and play with MCW.
I wouldn’t trade MCW for Exum straight up let alone with the 10th pick.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 5:22am #914091
Ebown5ParticipantThe Sixers are not trading MCW for anyone because there is no need to do so. The only reason to draft Exum is if you believe that he can be a shooting guard and play with MCW.
I wouldn’t trade MCW for Exum straight up let alone with the 10th pick.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 6:48am #914294
negguaryParticipantWhy is it everytime someone see’s a writers random suggestion we consider it to be a source, then say sourceS say as if its not merely a rumor. NO WAY sixers do this.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 6:48am #914161
negguaryParticipantWhy is it everytime someone see’s a writers random suggestion we consider it to be a source, then say sourceS say as if its not merely a rumor. NO WAY sixers do this.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 6:52am #914296
LeFlopJAMESParticipantEXUM is an enigma: tons of potential and a great combine…
but he played only in Australia…
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 6:52am #914163
LeFlopJAMESParticipantEXUM is an enigma: tons of potential and a great combine…
but he played only in Australia…
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 7:55am #914193
negguaryParticipantWHy would the sixers trade a proven player( MCW) for a player(EXUM) whose NBA comparison is that player(MCW) and we don’t know anything about him!
0 - Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2014 - 7:55am #914326
negguaryParticipantWHy would the sixers trade a proven player( MCW) for a player(EXUM) whose NBA comparison is that player(MCW) and we don’t know anything about him!
0 - AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. | Login |