Who Would You Want for Gay?

If the goal is in fact to trade Gay, what player would be your preference?


  • Total voters
    65
#1
Very simple premise... If Vlade is in fact sold on the idea of trading Gay and there is no chance we are keeping him around this year, what player would be your preference?
 
#2
If the situation is as you describe I want a SF as good as Gay or better. We can't afford to loose the second best player on the team without getting the second best back. Otherwise I can't help you with your question. Leave it to Vlade.
 
#5
Saw a rumor last week that intrigued me but the website seemed somewhat disreputable so I didn't post it. Rudy for Rodney Stuckey and Monta Ellis works.
 
#7
Would a bag of potato chips be included under "Other?"

The addition by subtraction rule has always applied to Rudy.
That's the "lazy" approach when assessing Gay's impact on a team. The same people tend to think if Cousins was any good that we would be winning 40-50 games.

All it is are people looking to take the easy way out when trying to explain an outcome. Either they don't have the time or don't care to inform themselves enough. There's no problem with that. You have the right to take any stance you want, but it's going to leave your arguments looking weak and vulnerable when posting here.
 
#14
Brandon Knight is probably our best chance to move Rudy Gay for equal value.

Otherwise, we may be looking for a player with upside like PG Cameron Payne and filler.
 
#15
We have a team. What do we need most? A PF amongst starters and a back up PG. if Vlade wants to get rid of Gay then he has dug the hole of needs much deeper. The only current player I want to see gone is Ben. You can't trade Gay for a starting PF, a backup PG and a starting SF. Doing nothing might be better than outing Gay.
 
#16
We have a team. What do we need most? A PF amongst starters and a back up PG. if Vlade wants to get rid of Gay then he has dug the hole of needs much deeper. The only current player I want to see gone is Ben. You can't trade Gay for a starting PF, a backup PG and a starting SF. Doing nothing might be better than outing Gay.
I disagree. I think we need a starting PG (Collison puts out a lot of effort, but he does really well coming off the bench and we need a scorer off the bench). I think WCS will show signs of growth this season and make the starting PF spot his (it's what we drafted him for after all, not to mention we finally have a good defensive coach to tap into his defensive talent/potential).

Taj Gibson was a possibility for a starting PF, but now with the Bulls running 3 ball dominant guards and no Pau, they need Gibson and Rudy wouldn't fit in at all with them. I still think the best bets are Miami, Thunder, and the Suns. The Suns have a pair of PGs (one that I like, but is frequently injured, the other would be decent value in return) and Miami has Dragic, who is big for a PG and would fit the mold we set this offseason (he's my choice in the above list). However, Miami doesn't really get any better trading Dragic for Gay, if anything, they would definitely want to keep Dragic and get Rudy alongside him. The Thunder are an option too, but I don't like anything they have to offer. Payne hasn't proven a thing and you don't trade a proven scorer for an unproven PG.

Darkhorse trade partner: Boston
 
#17
I disagree. I think we need a starting PG (Collison puts out a lot of effort, but he does really well coming off the bench and we need a scorer off the bench). I think WCS will show signs of growth this season and make the starting PF spot his (it's what we drafted him for after all, not to mention we finally have a good defensive coach to tap into his defensive talent/potential).

Taj Gibson was a possibility for a starting PF, but now with the Bulls running 3 ball dominant guards and no Pau, they need Gibson and Rudy wouldn't fit in at all with them. I still think the best bets are Miami, Thunder, and the Suns. The Suns have a pair of PGs (one that I like, but is frequently injured, the other would be decent value in return) and Miami has Dragic, who is big for a PG and would fit the mold we set this offseason (he's my choice in the above list). However, Miami doesn't really get any better trading Dragic for Gay, if anything, they would definitely want to keep Dragic and get Rudy alongside him. The Thunder are an option too, but I don't like anything they have to offer. Payne hasn't proven a thing and you don't trade a proven scorer for an unproven PG.

Darkhorse trade partner: Boston
Maybe Miami would do Dragic for Gay if we throw in some pick swaps :) How far out do we have to go to find a draft pick we can offer to swap - 2020?
 
#20
Maybe Miami would do Dragic for Gay if we throw in some pick swaps :) How far out do we have to go to find a draft pick we can offer to swap - 2020?
It's possible, but I think Vlade is a GM that greatly values draft picks and seems to have learned his lesson of not trading them away like hot cakes (think Philly trade). I also think you're right on the 2020 aspect, but I'm not 100% sure.

Dragic is a steady vet that knows how to play, and most importantly, can run a team. However, getting him would be difficult. I think Miami would be the hardest trade partner to work with out of the 3 I listed, mostly because getting Gay while giving up Dragic doesn't make any sense for them (unless we include Collison, which is entirely possible because we have Temple now). The only issue is that we would be giving out a lot of good veteran/proven talent while not getting much back.
 
#21
I think Porter would be the most realistic and best option available. Washington is not fully sold on him (which means they miiight be willing to move him), he is a 3 and D player, and he still has a good bit of room to grow.
 
#22
It's possible, but I think Vlade is a GM that greatly values draft picks and seems to have learned his lesson of not trading them away like hot cakes (think Philly trade). I also think you're right on the 2020 aspect, but I'm not 100% sure.

Dragic is a steady vet that knows how to play, and most importantly, can run a team. However, getting him would be difficult. I think Miami would be the hardest trade partner to work with out of the 3 I listed, mostly because getting Gay while giving up Dragic doesn't make any sense for them (unless we include Collison, which is entirely possible because we have Temple now). The only issue is that we would be giving out a lot of good veteran/proven talent while not getting much back.

Dragic is definitely the only realistic player Miama might consider moving. Winslow and Whiteside are the new cornerstones of their franchise.
 
#23
We have a team. What do we need most? A PF amongst starters and a back up PG. if Vlade wants to get rid of Gay then he has dug the hole of needs much deeper. The only current player I want to see gone is Ben. You can't trade Gay for a starting PF, a backup PG and a starting SF. Doing nothing might be better than outing Gay.
No reason in selling so incredibly low on McLemore. We are better off seeing if he develops at all and if he does not we lose out on like a protected 2nd round pick by not dealing him.
 
#24
Dragic is definitely the only realistic player Miama might consider moving. Winslow and Whiteside are the new cornerstones of their franchise.
Agreed. If they wanted Collison too, I really don't see anyone on their roster that the Kings would want apart from Dragic (they obviously will not move their other main pieces, like you said). So it turns out to be a Rudy-Dragic swap (which worked on trade machine), but that doesn't do anything for them. Stalemate
 
#25
Like most I would like to see a quality PG in return for Gay. However I don't see many teams with a oversupply of PGs. Not Houston, Miami, Utah..
Boston, Phoenix, Minnesota, who else? are loaded so I would look there.
If I thought Tyreke still had good tread left I would consider him as NO is set in that position. OKC might want Rudy but again Payne is Westbrooks backup for now.
If Vlade hadn't already loaded up on every other position the possibilities might be easier.
 
#30
That's the "lazy" approach when assessing Gay's impact on a team. The same people tend to think if Cousins was any good that we would be winning 40-50 games.

All it is are people looking to take the easy way out when trying to explain an outcome. Either they don't have the time or don't care to inform themselves enough. There's no problem with that. You have the right to take any stance you want, but it's going to leave your arguments looking weak and vulnerable when posting here.
Well, I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep if somebody thinks my posts are "weak and vulnerable." His track record suggests that the teams he has played for usually end up better after he's gone (more so in Toronto). I've been around basketball my entire life and I go by feel a lot. I just don't think that Rudy helps a team much. Individually, he has some great qualities but it doesn't translate to winning basketball.