NBA Trade Rumors Member Posts


JedIII's Profile

Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded

No Profile Picture uploaded


Where from:

Favourite player:

Best team moment:



JedIII's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To JedIII's Posts



To JedIII's last 5 rumours posts


To JedIII's last 5 talk posts


To JedIII's last 5 rumour replies


To JedIII's last 5 talk replies


JedIII's rumours posts with other poster's replies to JedIII's rumours posts


06 Jul 2017 02:13:03
Swing for the fence trade...

Bos-Avery Bradley
Jaylen Brown
Jae Crowder
Terry Rozier
Jordan Mickey
2018 Nets pick
2019 Memphis pick

Utah-Rudy Gobert

Th numbers would be close to allow for the a Gordon H. signing as well. I am well aware that the likelihood is LOW, but I think this is a relatively equal trade for both teams.


1.) 06 Jul 2017 05:30:18
Gobert is untouchable.

2.) 06 Jul 2017 10:54:20
Gobert would be a great fit in Boston as a defensive anchor that just turned 25, signed for next 4 years and is a much better rebounder than anyone they have. I wouldn't say Gobert is untouchable with Jazz losing Hayward and Gobert not quite the franchise caliber player who can fill his void due to his offensive limitations (Not to mention the loaded western conference) . that's pretty great value to me if I'm the Jazz especially since Favors could be slid back to center and could see if he could recoup his old form (and stay healthy) . Nets pick would enable them to get a replacement big man, Crowder can fill in some of void left by Hayward, Brown is a good young piece and that Memphis pick will probably be in lotto with that aging Memphis team in a loaded west.

Financially Celtics would have to do more to make it work but I think they should explore it.



06 Jul 2017 00:58:55
Bos-Jae Crowder
NY-Kyle O'Quinn

This trade would save Boston a little less than $3mm (for Gordon H. signing) and would produce a replacement for Amir Johnson.

The Knicks would be receiving the better player on a team friendly contract and would turn their depth from the bigs into a wing.


1.) 06 Jul 2017 10:55:10
I think Celtics could get better value on Crowder however Oquinn wouldn't be a bad backup big.




JedIII's talk posts with other poster's replies to JedIII's talk posts


08 Jul 2017 19:27:24
I want to be clear that I don't believe this has a shred of hope, but with LeBron passively threatening to leave Cleveland and with Golden State having luxury tax issues in a couple of years, who would say no in this trade?

Cle-LeBron James
GS-Klay Thompson
Draymond Green


1.) 08 Jul 2017 20:14:13
I think both say no but Golden State louder. The two are bitter rivals so I think a trade between the two is heavily unlikely. Trading Lebron sounds taboo but looking at Cavs situation where they don't have many avenues to improve and Lebron leaving for nothing, adding two younger all-stars to their two remaining all-stars of Kyrie and Love doesn't sound bad at all but then you look at Golden State and you realize you just helped put the top 2 players in the NBA together along with Curry who is probably top 5 and I don't think you beat them in a series of 7 with all 3 able to take over a game. Also, with a big 4 of their own the Cavs would encounter the very same salary cap issues the Warriors would be trying to avoid in the future when they may have the best chance to beat Warriors as Lebron ages past 35.

On Golden States end I think they've made it clear they don't care much about the luxury tax issues as evident by their aggressive offseason. If this is the case the only thing stopping them from keeping this core together is if one of them wants out (although they could be a part of a historic dynasty and one of the most dominant teams ever so I doubt they would) since with their Bird rights GS can give them more money than any other team. Lebron is great and likely talented enough to make it work between him, Durant and Curry but I don't think anyone would argue he wouldn't be as good a fit as Klay and Draymond who both don't need the ball as much and are elite defenders (Lebron's effort on the defense end has waned over past few years) . They are also both 5 years younger than Lebron which enables this team to compete at the highest level for longer.

The cost to retain both is significant but I think if Warriors were to trade one of them it wouldn't happen for at least another year and they'd want a high draft pick/ promising prospect (s) still on rookie deal and a veteran that can hold them over in the meantime (or a trade exception so they can get one via FA) . If Warriors want to continue the dynasty they'll have to add some higher level young talent and they aren't going to get good draft picks anytime soon.



18 Jun 2017 00:27:38
I know 'tis the season for trade proposals, free agent signings, and other fantasy ideas for changing our favorite teams into title contenders, but I want to change my favorite sport. The NBA is set up very poorly; business wise and basketball wise.

There are many things we all would change, but what is one thing you would change on the court and or one thing you would change off the court?

Off the Court: I would eliminate max contracts; cost certainty for elite players hinders competitive balance in the league and makes the top 10 or so players bargains, which gives those teams a HUGE advantage in a sport so affected by having the best player on the floor.

On the Court: When teams are in the bonus, give the fouled team the choice of free throws or possession. The idea of bonus free throws after so many team fouls was designed to give the team being fouled an advantage. The way the game is played today makes that the opposite. It also slows the game down terribly and sometimes becomes a FT contest.


1.) 18 Jun 2017 01:26:50
I'd say max contracts hurt teams more than helping them. There are probably 10 to 15 players in the league worth the max and far more with the max.

2.) 18 Jun 2017 05:25:37
I agree a change should be done around max contracts but I don't think eliminating them is the right thing to do. The player's association would never allow it since what would end up happening is the top 1% of NBA players would make like 90% of all the money. Similar to how the new super-max contracts are I think there should be more explicit criteria that allows a player to get different levels of max contracts. This would not only help reward the best players more but not allow teams to foolishly give max contracts to guys underserving of them. For example hitting certain accolades such as making an all-nba team, starting over 60 games, finishing top 10 in assists and things like that should be able to boost the amount of money you can get from some baseline max which is lower than current numbers. I also, don't like how max contracts are currently tied to how long you've been in the NBA since players typically become less valuable the longer they've been in the NBA and nobody wants to be paying 30+ year olds 30+ mill per year.




JedIII's rumour replies


Click To View This Thread

18 Jun 2017 00:30:32
I feel, on this website, most people do not understand the salary cap. Including Saric would add salary and take the Celtics out of the running for Gordon H. Or Blake G. Gordon H. Would cost less on a max deal than Blake G. ( and would also be a better fit) . If the Celtics trade the #1 for the #3 and take on no other salary this year they will be less than $1mm shy of max money availability for Gordon H., and that's if they renounce everyone basically. Part of the lure of this trade to Ainge is the cap space to sign a guy. I only see this trade happening if it is #1 for #3, LAL pick next year and Sac pick in 2019, because Ainge won't trade for "equal" value and he won't take on salary. If PHI is willing it will get done.




Click To View This Thread

17 Jun 2017 19:12:57
I think the Paul contract is too low. I agree that Mills would not be signed because of Bpd0003's thoughts. Lastly, Simmons might get more because of the landscape of contracts this year in the NBA.




Click To View This Thread

17 Jun 2017 19:00:15
The Celtics would not have enough room to sign either Gordon H. or Blake G. In this trade scenario, let alone both. Therefore, the Celtics would say no because it would be Fultz, probable top 5 pick next year, and the ability to sign Hayward or Griffin for Butler.




Click To View This Thread

16 Jun 2017 02:36:07
The Celtics would NOT have nearly enough money to pursue Gordon H. Unless he was willing to take a contract for $15mm per year. obviously a no.




Click To View This Thread

15 Jun 2017 23:05:57
I'm starting to think Okafor has negative trade value. He has been on the block for a while now and no one wants him. Therefore, this trade would not work for Sacramento. assuming they aren't interested in the 5&10 for 3 idea (and they shouldn't be interested) .





JedIII's talk replies