NBA Trade Rumors Member Posts


Gsess's Profile

Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded

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



To Gsess's last 5 rumours posts


To Gsess's last 5 banter posts


To Gsess's last 5 rumour replies


To Gsess's last 5 banter replies


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


24 Jul 2016 06:25:45

Raptors get Faried, Casspi, Koufos

Nuggets get Cousins, Gay, one of 2017 LAC pick or future 1st in 18/ 19/ 20 (Kings choice) from Toronto

Kings get Gallinari, Nurkic, (Memphis) 2017 1st round pick from Nuggets, Ross, Patterson, Wright, Nogueira, 2017 LAC pick or future 1st in 18/ 19/ 20 (Kings choice)


1.) 24 Jul 2016 12:12:14
i woulnd't that if a were the nuggets.
they should develop Jokic and don't go for Cousins.
Cousins is an ass and he should go to a team that can handle him. I don't believe Denver is a place that can handle Cousins.

2.) 25 Jul 2016 18:11:36
Gay is older but close to Gallo. Gallo younger but injury prone. Nurik has to go for Cousins. Jokic goes for the 4 to take over for Fareid.



20 Jul 2016 17:39:09
4 way trade to remove logjams/ problems, fill needs

Raptors get Koufos from Kings, Mirotic/ Snell from Bulls

Celtics get Gay/ McLemore from Kings

Bulls get Bradley from Celtics, Nogueira from Raptors

Kings get Ross/ Wright/ 2017 1st from Raptors, Jerebko/ Young from Celtics

Raptors get depth at 3/ 4/ 5, gives them more options.


1.) 20 Jul 2016 18:45:00
I don't see the "remove logjams/ problems, fill needs" part for the Celtics. We are replacing Bradley with a far worse player in McLemore and then replacing Jerebko with an over priced inefficient player in Gay. Young is useless to every team so he is just a throw in.

I just don't see Gay as being able to be that number 1 scoring option on a successful team. I would rather have players that know how to play like a team with Bradley and Jerebko.

2.) 20 Jul 2016 21:11:19
If you don't like the trade fair enough, didn't envision him being the number 1 option on the team though, more as wing depth/ sixth man scoring role, but either way Gay is neither overpriced or inefficient, he may have been at one time, however, he has evolved a bit as a player, he was top 10 in fg% among SF's, shot a passable .344 from 3 and avg 17+ pts/ 6+ boards, in the new NBA that's easily a 20 mil dollar player, look at what Evan Turner got from Portland for not even close to the same production, I would think Jerebko will almost certainly be buried on the bench, with Horford/ Johnson/ Zeller/ Olynyk/ Mickey/ and which ever kids they keep taking up the bulk of 4/ 5 minutes and his production would be easily replaceable, and the emergence of Smart/ Rozier along with Thomas could help negate the loss of Bradley, if you'd prefer I could see Smart instead of Bradley in the deal with a little bookkeeping magic, I was just thinking the 1 is by far their biggest position of strength and the fact that the Celtics have shown interest in Gay has been widely reported, would you not agree that scoring from the 3/ wing would be the biggest area of need on your team? You have a good coach that runs a really good defensive system that can hide a players defensive deficiencies (Sullinger had good numbers in his system) . Adding 17 pts a game plus bench depth with potential upside along with opening minutes for Smart/ Rozier would be more valuable than what you would lose IMO, but it's your team, you'd know better than me.

3.) 20 Jul 2016 21:50:18
Its just to me Thomas (who was our number 1 scorer last year) isn't a number one scoring option on a team that wants to compete. Bradley was our number 2 scoring option and I would think he would stay the number 2 with the way our system works with drive and kicks. I don't see Gay as being a good fit because I think he shoots the ball a heck of a lot and that for a player to do that he should be scoring more than 17 a game. He easily comes in here and is labeled the number 1 scoring option. And Jerekbo is probably the first or second big off the bench for us because of his stretch 4 abilities and his abilities to guard smaller guys. Its him and Olynyk as our 4 and 5 off the bench. Both of those guys were key players in our success last year and I just don't see a need to trade them for a player that no other team wants and his past teams have done better once he left.

4.) 21 Jul 2016 04:47:13
Hahaha look. One stat. Top 10 among sf. Awesome point made. He was in the top 3rd on one stat. Totally worth it.

Gay is a career loser. Fact.



12 Jul 2016 20:15:42

Raptors get Covington, Holmes

Sixers get Ross, Wright, future pick

Raptors get backup more suited for the 3, pf prospect, clear some space

Sixers get 3/ D shooter with BC connection, suited best for the 2, pg prospect with upside/ good size, future draft pick, better roster balance, closer to cap floor, option to resign Wood.


1.) 12 Jul 2016 22:15:36
Sixers wouldn't be gaining anything in this deal. Covington does a lot of the same things at, I assume, a much lower price.

2.) 12 Jul 2016 22:37:57
Gain a draft pick, solid pg prospect with size which they lack, clear the logjam in the front court, clear playing time for Grant/ Thompson/ Simmons/ Saric, better 2 guard depth, movable assets.

3.) 12 Jul 2016 23:28:58
Ehh. No reason for the deal.

4.) 13 Jul 2016 00:09:21
They don't need any more draft picks. who's the prospect you speak of? . Simmons and Saric will both have plenty of run and Thompson doesn't need to be on the floor.

5.) 13 Jul 2016 02:24:52
Really, your historically bad basketball team doesn't need more draft picks, you don't have to make the picks, but assets never hurt. The prospect I speak of is Delon Wright, who was stuck behind an all star pg, and one of the best back ups in the league, on a 56 win ECF team, and didn't get many minutes, but dominated the D league and played well in the NBA when called upon, would probably be starting for the Sixers by December, but I mean Bayless and? are pretty good too, I know, I know? is underrated and you'd rather have him than Wright, but you are wrong, Delon is better, much better, try watching him play, bet you change your mind. Oh and, your GM was just interviewed during summer league and said his first order of business is dealing with the unbalanced lineup, that he would be looking to move bigs, that he wanted Grant to get more minutes at the 3, that Thompson's size is intriguing at the 2/ 3 and that he'd like to find room to keep Wood, but what does he know.

6.) 13 Jul 2016 05:32:53
Ok, first of all there are a lot of guys that dominate in the D league and never do anything in the NBA. That's a ridiculous point to even try to make.

I agree Toronto had a very good season last year but your prospect had almost nothing to do with it. I'm sure he was a great practice player.

Bayless Is a stop gap for whoever the Sixers draft next year with kings and/ Lakers pick. No one is claiming him to be underrated or anything like that, but he is a professional in the NBA for several years now. Something that your guy can't necessarily say. I'd be willing to bet your guy wouldn't even play over TJ mcconnell let alone start by mid season.

Lastly, I've watched Hollis Thompson for two plus years now and he's a bum. I like Grant but he can't shoot the ball even a little bit. Great defender though.

7.) 13 Jul 2016 05:35:15
. but besides the wasted time debating a meaningless player this senario, as stated above, really has no reason to happen from a Sixers standpoint.

8.) 13 Jul 2016 06:24:38
I understand many guys who can dominate in D league never amount to much, however dominating in D league does show a player may have a shot, at least more so than one who doesn't. I agree he had nothing to do with the 56 wins or playoff success of the Raptors, I brought them up to show why he didn't play, not to say he was in any way responsible for it. On a team that didn't have the guard depth of the Raptors he would have been a servicable back up. Same as you have watched Hollis Thompson for 2 years and he is a bum, I watched Bayless be a stop gap with the Raptors a few years ago and so was he, Delon Wright is a far superior player than Bayless is/ was. My rumor was initiated by the words of your GM, I could not care less if Grant or Covington or for that matter Simmons or Saric have enough minutes to keep them happy, or play at all, but if you don't want to use Covington or Thompson or Holmes, the Raptors could and what I offered is what I think they are worth. The Sixers are going to do something and they could do a lot worse than acquiring good young players from a winning team and a draft pick for what according to your GM sounds like the 14/ 15 guys on your depth chart, from what I've read the Raptors turned down Ross/ Wright for Noel/ pick, so maybe they have more value to the basketball people in charge of your team than they do to you. Sorry to have wasted your valuable trade rumors time, and good luck this season.

9.) 13 Jul 2016 14:05:49
Alot of rumors going around this time of year. Colangelo has been quoted several times, like you said, that they need balance on the roster. But he's also been quoted as saying he isn't going trade guys just to trade them.

This trade wouldn't necessarily be an upgrade anywhere on the roster. Like you said though, I probably don't value Ross as much as most. I also admitidly value Covington more then I should.

10.) 13 Jul 2016 16:25:51
As it should be, always want the best value for your team, me too, meant no disrespect, just thought there may be a fit there, but like everything posted on this site it was what I thought would be fair value if they were going to explore a deal not any kind of prediction. I don't think you over value Covington, but I get the feeling BC under values him, and if that's the case I'd like to see the Raptors take advantage of that situation. Think he's a useful player and think it would be a shame if he gets lost in the mix with the new guys. Same with Holmes, think he has earned a shot, and am not sure he will have a chance to build on that in Philly. Anyway, good debate, thanks for keeping it civil, we will see what happens. Good luck.



11 Jul 2016 22:40:53

Raptors get Chandler

Nuggets get Gay

Kings get Ross/ Wright, future 2nd

Raptors get good vet backup 3/ 4

Nuggets get scorer, less injury worries

Kings get rid of Gay, get younger 2/ 3 signed long term/ Young backup pg with good size, upside.


1.) 12 Jul 2016 03:22:08
I don't know why Denver would do this. it'd make more sense for dancer to get Ross as the young guy and Sac to get Wil.



11 Jul 2016 05:33:09

Raptors get Davis, Aminu from Blazers, Young from Celtics

Celtics get Ross from Raptors

Blazers get Jerebko, Rozier from Celtics, Nogueira from Raptors

Raptors get backup 5 to replace Biyombo, improved depth at 3/ 4

Celtics get 3/ D guy on wing with upside, clear roster spot

Blazers clear space to resign Harkless (Jerebko is non-guaranteed ), get backup pg, young 5.


1.) 11 Jul 2016 07:03:33
JJ is now guaranteed his money now.

2.) 11 Jul 2016 07:14:01
Oops, my bad, missed that, still could work, drop Nogueria add a 1st from Raps to Portland.

3.) 12 Jul 2016 17:57:24
So first off the Ross going to the Celtics just seems kind of pointless, and second why would the blazers give up two good role players who are arguably as good or better just to resign Harkless when they still have money to give him?

4.) 13 Jul 2016 01:42:07
Yeah, totally pointless, sure the Celtics are looking for three point and wing depth but why would they want to add a wing who can shoot 3's, good observation. You are right about Harkless too, makes much more sense for a young team to let a 23 year old improving SF, that you traded one of your best players for, that teammates referred to as a difference maker walk, so you can hold on to pretty good role players that I guarantee will not be there when/ if (big IF) Blazers are ready to contend. It's known as selling high, it's one way teams get better, along with draft picks (oops your team gave some of those away too didn't they), and allowing young players (such as Harkless) to grow together. But having a 120 mil payroll on long term deals, with Plumlee and McCollum becoming free agents next year will definitely work. Silly me, don't know what I was thinking.

5.) 14 Jul 2016 06:38:59
Honestly Celtics can go for bigger fish than Ross and blazers could probably get more for Davis and Aminu if they wanted to trade them but still they could get harkless on the roster without getting rid of anyone. And for cap space for next year the blazers have better options than just trading valuable players for players just to lower there salaries.

6.) 14 Jul 2016 06:54:03
First off you are wrong in almost every single way. First of all the Blazers just flat out don't have to give up anyone to sign Harkless, so why would they? Second the trail blazers gave up a top 55 protected pick, so either that's a horrible joke, or you just have no idea what you're talking about (like normal) . Third both mcCollum and Plumlee have bird rights so regardless of salary the blazers can keep them if they want to, Paul Allen has plenty of money. Gsess you are still hands down the worst person on this site with little knowledge at all for the NBA or even the game of basketball. You are a waste of a human life.

7.) 14 Jul 2016 17:41:03
@Coolcjl: SAVAGE! But, you're not wrong.

8.) 14 Jul 2016 20:23:27
Who did they take in the 1st round this year again? Seems to have slipped my mind. I realize they have the ability to sign Harkless without giving anyone away, which will lead to a payroll in the vicinity of 150 mil after resigning McCollum and Plumlee next year, kind of pricey for a team that doesn't belong in the same conversation as GS/ LAC/ Spurs. Coolcjl, you sir (I use the term very loosely) are an ignorant waste of skin, that makes blanket statements without having any facts or knowledge to back them up, you make disrespectful comments when you don't agree with a contrary opinion or idea, like a petulant child, which is a sure sign of stupidity. Instead of insulting and questioning the intelligence of people for expressing an opinion or idea on a site which exists for people to express there opinions or ideas and to get constructive criticism, go read a book (one without pictures would be preferable, could be hard for you, but don't get discouraged, I believe if you work hard at it, in a few years you might be able to get to an 8th grade level) I have faith in you. By the way you used first off twice in the first few lines of the above post, kind of redundant (I know kind of a big word for you, sound it out, and if you don't know what that means try a dictionary) . Pleasure speaking to you, have a nice day, and stay weird Portland.

9.) 14 Jul 2016 20:42:31
F. T. L. O. B -you are totally right if the Celtics decide to go in that direction, they can land bigger fish, if they strike out with that they may look at other viable options, of which I believe Ross could be one. You are right about Blazers having other option to move out players if need be as well, just think they may be better served in the long term by having more significant minutes for younger, up and coming players or new acquisitions, Ezeli/ Leonard/ Plumlee/ Vonleah/ Davis/ Aminu/ Harkless/ Turner/ Layman is kind of a crowded front court, no? Not saying they may not be able to get more for Davis/ Aminu either, just that if Raptors were interested in them and Portland was looking to move them, that's the approx. framework I think Raptors could/ would offer. If Blazers can do better more power to them, just not sure I'd give significantly more. Thanks for your input, you're probably right.

10.) 14 Jul 2016 23:57:20
The only person I have ever insulted on this site is you Surly. I decided to see if it was just me that you were condescending to, but nope. You say I am the one who insults you when I don't agree with your opinion, but just look at this thread I started with a completely neutral statement when you decided to insult me when you did not agree, and just look at this thread people agree with me. So all I ask of you is to not be a hypocrite, and accept that your opinion is not perfect and we all have a bias including you.




Gsess's banter posts with other poster's replies to Gsess's banter posts


12 Jul 2016 22:28:18
Need some help, can someone please explain to me how the Pacers have theoretically gained more than 11 games on the Raptors in the off-season. I respect the Pacers additions and believe they have improved, however 11 games is a lot to make up, taking into consideration the Raptors played the vast majority of last season without their starting 3. I realize they have lost Biyombo, and he was extremely valuable, but he is getting way too much credit for their success, he was a back up 5 that put up 5/ 8 (and played good D), but has been replaced by a top 10 pick who was widely reported to be among the most nba ready of the class. Add to that the emergence of Powell and yearly improvement of one of the younger teams in the NBA (7th I believe, and that was with Scola and Johnson, probably top 5 now) as well as replacing an aging Scola (8/ 5) with Sullinger (10/ 8) and I don't get the perception they have taken a step back, which would mean people believe Pacers will win 60+? I just don't see it, so I went on Trade Machine to try an 8 for 8 trade with rotation players, Raptors would lose 15 games, and that's without Sullinger. If I'm wrong, I'm more than willing to accept it, but, I ask you, am I?


1.) 13 Jul 2016 00:06:58
I'm thinking since the raptors won 56 games and haven't improved roster wise that some people think they will win about 50 games. With the pacers roster change they can get to about 60 games.

2.) 13 Jul 2016 02:41:16
Wouldn't having your starting 3 back and healthy, a new starting PF with better numbers and 2 first round picks count as improving or at least maintaining your team. Guess they haven't had a splashy off-season, but did they really have to? I just see the changes the Pacers made as adding 5, if everything goes right, maybe 10 wins but don't see how Raptors significantly drop, they've improved their record every year since Casey took over, don't see why that would change. For that matter Raptors were only a game behind the Cavs and how did they improve? Maybe I'm more biased than I think I am, but I think it's more likely for the Raptors or Celtics to finish 1st than for Pacers to finish 2nd.

3.) 13 Jul 2016 17:28:31
I don't think the pacers will be top 3 team in the east because they have to have chemistry. But, talent wise they are much better. Also, the raptors system is pretty much derozan and lowery isolation. They don't use big Val enough offensively and they don't shoot great 3 point shots.

4.) 13 Jul 2016 21:04:34
Raptors did OK running an iso heavy offense last year, don't see why it would be less successful now, and I agree they didn't feature JV enough however I think his dominance before getting hurt in the playoffs last year may have changed that, Casey and Ujiri have both made a point in every interview I've seen of saying he would be more of a focus next season. Their 3 point % was top 10 in the league and Demarre Carroll who is one of their best shooters missed almost the entire year, coupled with Powell who has been shooting over 50% from 3 in summer league after coming on strong in the second half last season and the fact Demar has said he is focused on improving from long range as well as Patterson having a sub par shooting season, I think that problem (if it was a big problem) will remedy itself. The youth and upside of this team seem to be getting lost somewhere, by my count they currently only have Lowry/ Carroll at 29 or older and JV/ Ross/ Sully/ Joesph/ Powell are all rotation players that are under 25. I just don't think the Raptors get the respect they deserve, and have not seen a good argument as to why, kind of comes down to giving credit where credit is due, or losing all credibility.

5.) 13 Jul 2016 21:25:20
After double checking, Raptors were actually top 5 in 3 point %, without Carroll or a full season of Powell. Indiana was far behind that and only added Teague, who takes and makes fewer than George Hill who he is replacing. The more I look into it the more the Pacers love makes no sense, IMO still behind Cavs/ Raptors/ Celtics and possibly behind Hawks/ Pistons/ Bulls/ Knicks (if they remain healthy) .

6.) 13 Jul 2016 23:45:52
They will be the 4th seed IMO. PG is a bad man.

7.) 14 Jul 2016 07:01:19
KING: Pacers or Raptors?

8.) 14 Jul 2016 15:04:11
I think Raptors will be better record wise, give me the Pacers in a seven game series.

9.) 14 Jul 2016 17:35:08
Disagree, but fair enough, never know what can happen in playoffs.



06 Jul 2016 21:29:24
Which 3 teams are currently looking at the biggest regular season regression/ improvement at this point in the off-season? (it's still early)

⬆- 1. Utah
2. Orlando
3. Knicks (if healthy-BIG IF) / Boston

⬇- 1. OKC
2. Spurs
3. Atlanta/ Portland.


1.) 06 Jul 2016 22:01:10


2.) 06 Jul 2016 22:51:00


3.) 06 Jul 2016 23:33:42


4.) 06 Jul 2016 23:50:44


5.) 07 Jul 2016 02:38:19
After tonight's turn of events I would have to change Atlanta/ Portland to Miami, probably the right move in the long run but for next year think it's going to hurt.



31 Jan 2016 22:27:31

Raptors get Faried

Nuggets get Patterson, Wright, Raptors 1st in 2016/ 17/ 18 their choice

Raptors get starting PF

Nuggets get Stretch 4, good defensive pg prospect, future 1st pick, save a ton of money.





Gsess's rumour replies


Click To View This Thread

29 Jul 2016 00:16:01
Rapsfan: That isn't how sign and trades work, he would be signing with Celtic's either way, it would be lose him for nothing or take what you can get. He's not going to sign a contract and then let OKC pick where he goes. I agree with Gasupo, can't see anybody giving up much more than a draft pick/ or player for cap relief in a sign and trade. If they don't think they're going to sign him, best move him by the deadline.




Click To View This Thread

28 Jul 2016 16:49:09
Wasn't an actual rumour, was a fantasy scenario on BR, there is no way Raptors move JV or Powell for 1 year of Griffen and Koufos, and the writer must have been from Charlotte because they are getting a steal.




Click To View This Thread

25 Jul 2016 18:07:23
Celtics would have to move Johnson, maybe Rozier along with Crowder and pick to make it work value/ money wise. Would leave Celtics awful thin and undersized at the 2/ 3, but in theory it could work.




Click To View This Thread

23 Jul 2016 15:59:55
Doesn't work cap wise, Boston would have to move out 12+ million in salary. I know Bucks want to move Munroe but think they would hold out for more than Rozier/ Hunter.




Click To View This Thread

23 Jul 2016 03:11:35
Can't really see a fit for Phoenix unless they can move Chandler, then maybe Okafor/ Covington/ Stauskas and a 1st if a third team gets involved. Not sure they would move him though. Anybody else you can think of? Maybe, Knight/ McCollum/ Evans/ Holiday? If they don'the make a trade who do you think they let walk?





Gsess's banter replies


Click To View This Thread

28 Jul 2016 21:58:14
In terms of super teams: If the Warriors are the Avengers (Different pieces good on there own join forces), the Cavs would be the Justice League (Superman and a bunch of other guys in uniforms), Knicks would be at best the Expendables (Best days are behind them, might be OK for one more mission), or more likely the Mystery Men (delusions of greatness but and at the end of the day, just a bunch of guys nobody else really wanted)




Click To View This Thread

28 Jul 2016 06:16:41
As a Raptors fan I'd take that deal, not sure Sixers would have to include a 1st, maybe Ross, Wright, 2017 1st for Noel, Covington, Holmes/ Stauskas or Thompson. Gives Sixers versatile shooter, pg prospect, late first (throw in for trades), Raptors get young replacement for Biz, depth players with some upside and term (not sure they'd want to move Ross for a free agent they might lose), save some money.




Click To View This Thread

15 Jul 2016 05:52:33
Think he's saying keep all 3, figures 1 will always be hurt so they could form a 3 man rotation, hopefully always have 2 healthy.




Click To View This Thread

14 Jul 2016 17:35:08
Disagree, but fair enough, never know what can happen in playoffs.




Click To View This Thread

14 Jul 2016 17:32:47
In theory, love it, in reality having 6/ 7 developmental players would be tough. Looks like he could be a player, just a pretty big gamble when you are trying to win as well.