Reply With Quote
Gustazo, hermano! Cursé la facultad en Avellaneda y le tengo mucho cariño a la zona, pasaba a diario por la cancha del rojo (soy de boke igual, no sé qué hago hablando inglés por acá, jajaja). Abrazo!
Depends on how you assess and reallocate the value of the rest of the CHI though.
Gustazo, hermano! Cursé la facultad en Avellaneda y le tengo mucho cariño a la zona, pasaba a diario por la cancha del rojo (soy de boke igual, no sé qué hago hablando inglés por acá, jajaja). Abrazo!
Abrazo
Dream scenario (yes I know its unlikely that all of it is done, but individually can see a path to some of this + luck):
Land a top 4 pick in draft. Total game changer on its own for SA and that is a 20% chance.
But regardless of if we land in top 4 or get pick 9 or 10.
Would CHA do Jak + pick 25 for Plumlee + pick 13? They would not give SA a first for Jak at deadline but does getting whooped in play in change their mind on urgency paired with getting a first back in return too?
If so, SA either has pick 4 (for example) + pick 13 + pick 20 now. Or pick 9 + 13 + 20
IF that is executed, turn to POR who wants to win now and offer Richardson + 13 for pick 7? Do they value moving back 6 spots in lottery for some immediate help? Again, not sure, but seems somewhat reasonable for a team wanting to balance needing help but still getting a lottery pick.
But if that worked, now SA has pick 4, 7 and 20. OR Pick 7, 9 and 20.
Lakers willing to trade for Doug? THT + future top 10 protected first for Doug (may not work salary wise, but general framework)? Lakers get more help for Bron and SA doesnt take on any longer term money than already committed to Doug and gets a younger player that may fit better here?
Then say Lavine or Ayton or Mitc situation turns really sour. And SA can land one of them with cap space and/or sign and trade.
So SA has something like Lavine, picks 4, 7 and 20. Or Lavine, picks 7, 9 and 20 and has shed the older vets while still landing an all star type and moving things forward and filling the Doug/Jak/Richardson void with 3 firsts this year.
I know…dreaming, but point is there is a path for some real creative stuff here this off season ^
Spurs-Hornets talks reportedly broke down when Spurs asked for Hornets 1st in addition to Washington Jr. and Jones for Poeltl. What you're proposing the Hornets wouldn't even have the gall to offer.
Richardson's a nice win now piece for teams like the Hawks, Hornets, Trail Blazers, etc., but no one is moving down 6 spots from the mid to late lottery for a player of his caliber.
McDermott at that salary makes no sense for the Lakers, not does burning the Horton-Tucker asset (if he still is one) or at least salary slot.
Maybe, but IMO that is being the most extreme pessimist you can be and may not be rooted in reality.
A few things in my scenario changed for CHA vs at deadline talks: yes, they balked at including a first with Washington + Jones. In my scenario, they would be getting a first in return so that alone is a MASSIVE difference. On top of that, they got whooped in the play in and their lack of a C like Jakob was a big reason - so their su ions were likely confirmed. Then for the trifecta, in my scenario they go from offering up Washington and Jones and a first with nothing back for Jakob, to only offering Plumlee and getting a first back.
They may not do it, but between all 3 of those items, its no where near the same conversation and the reasons for doing the trade for CHA have increased dramatically. Would SA do that? Not sure, but if it was the path to getting them to pick 7 from 25/Jak then ya, I can see them doing something like that..
As you said, Richardson is a nice win now piece for POR. They have to do something or risk losing Dame. How many teams can offer them a lottery pick + solid player to help them both win now and build for their future? Slim market, but sure someone with pick 8, 10, 11 or 12 may be able to? Once you are outside of the top 4, moving back is not a huge gap like it is there. Still a gap no doubt and they may value not getting help now, but that is dicey and a scenario they will no doubt be weighing.
McDermott salary makes perfect sense for LA sense its basically a wash length wise with THT. They are not taking on years, but getting much obviously needed help. THT isn’t an asset, hes a bad deal without a great nba skill hence them needing to add a first.
They shopped THT all deadline and found absolutely no takers - did his value increase post deadline? Nope. Got worse.
Also true. They had no reason to play their starters their last game though to be fair.
? I'm saying the Spurs could do much better than that for Poeltl.
Seven to 13 is a sizable gap and one Richardson is no longer valued enough to fill. Just look at recent history, it takes a projected core, young piece to pull that off.
What the Lakers really need is two-way players and McDermott obviously isn't it. Horton-Tucker's value has obviously tanked, but I don't think it's at the point where he's an albatross or to where they'd move him for a negative value contract, one-way player.
I know you meant SA might not do it - was just pointing out the motivation for CHA to re-engage and the path where SA can do other moves by securing that 13th pick (even if it isn’t great value elsewhere in the deal).
7 to 13 is sizeable to a degree, but POR is in a unique situation. Yes, for other teams they likely would not want to move back but can POR really justify taking a player a 7 and passing on getting Dame some real help? Especially if they still get a lottery pick? Man, I dont know how they can do that wiht the corner they painted themselves into..
Lakers need shooting. Big time. They need vets who are not washed and they need a healthy non-toxic locker room. Doug fills a lot of that void and if the cost is a no value THT and a pick in the way future?
Again, I dont know what this all means, but I think there is a path for stuff like this to happen, even if I dont have every detail right lol
My heads spinning....I'm not sure I can stay on the merry go round here...I do like the way you're thinking...the biggest issue I have is the Portland trade...if they want to make Dame happy this isn't going to do it. Now if they land the 3rd or 4th pick they might have an interest in trading it for DJ but at 7 its tougher to see a deal with them that doesn't include 9.
I think Dame would be thrilled to land a legit role player to help him now while still getting a crack at a solid player in the lottery….I highly doubt Dame likes some young guy at 7 that may be great in the future over the guys available at 13.
It’s just not viewed as that big of a difference IMO
Put it this way: if we know its likely that Richardson could net us between pick 22 and 26 would POR trade pick 7 for pick 13 + 22? I think with them needing depth and talent they would consider that…
But Dame would rather have Richardson than 22 I am guessing.
I dont know how they value things, but just painting some scenarios that seem reasonable. POR is in a weird spot - they have cap space if the want it by letting Nurk go and waiving Bledsoe for his small guarantee (seems likely). But its a weak FA class and they need both talent and depth
Last edited by DPG21920; 04-18-2022 at 10:15 PM.
I don't think a young guy at 7 interests him nor a young guy at 13....if they're basing it on Dame then they trade it for a better player than Josh and take no pick back is what I'm saying..
I get that and its an option…but POR may want balance and needs to fill out a lot of roster spots. Not saying it would be POR Plan A - if someone is willing to trade an all star for pick 7 (kind of doubt that tbh) they easily do that deal first.
But saying if they are trying to find best balance of winning now while giving themselves wiggle room in case things go bad and Dame wants out, then getting a player while keeping a lottery pick has to be enticing.
Teams don’t trade picks on draft night,they trade picked player rights. To get Portlands #7, you’d have to have something IN HAND that they want when they’re on the clock, not, “we think we can do this wild backwards cascade trade”.
I am making some assumptions that they are going to do what they can to get best talent overall (if they can trade 7 for an all star they will) but that they will likely be in a situation where they will hedge their future some…
Just going through the mental exercise its hard to see a team that would want pick 7 and be willing to give up a known player that is anywhere close to all star level. For the same reason that POR would want to use pick 7 to get someone better than Richardson, pick 13 be damned, its likely that any player available that is really that good will fetch more than pick 7…
Spurs can make any of these trades once the draft lottery if finalized for example.
Interesting scenarios. Hard to say what Dame would want. Seems like most star players are horrible judges of talent but they often get what they want, but not what they need.
For sure. I dont think POR will just be about what Dame wants. They will obviously rebuild for him and he wants to win, but they will “likely” want some balance for their future should things implode. Moving back 6 spots while getting help but still getting a lottery pick seems like a +EV deal. Will something else materialize (trading 7 for an all star? Getting a better player than Richardson and lottery pick for 7?)? Hard to tell..
My gut feeling is they could do better than Richardson but I haven’t thought too much about it in detail.
So (for sake of this exercise) lets assume they want to do a deal where they get a player + a lottery pick and that SA has pick 9 (their own) and pick 13 from Jak to CHA.
That means, their only other alternatives are team with pick 8, 10, 11, 12 and 14.
As of now that looks like: New Orleans, Washington, New York, OKC and CLE
Who could NO offer as a player with pick 8 to move to 7 that they would want to do to move up one spot? Seems unlikely they would do that. Maybe they could move 8 plus a future first for 7 though and POR takes that. But does not seem likely to give up a good player and 8 for one spot up for a team that wants to move forward too.
Washington could beat SA pick with 10 instead of 13 but would they give up Kuzma or Pope to move up to 7 from 10? Definitely possible and I say that definitely beats SA package.
New York with pick 11 could move Fournier or Derrick Rose? Not sure POR wants Fournier salary but Id say with it being pick 11 and those players they could beat SA offer too.
OKC with pick 12 could move Favors, but I am not sure that beats SA package.
CLE has a worse pick 14, but could offer Lauri and that might beat SA but not sure if CLE does that but possible.
So there are teams that could beat sa, especially WASH and NY, so who knows how likely. Plus I am assuming its Bledsoe in any deal out for POR, but they may rather waive him for the 15M in cap space vs taking on a guaranteed player so this all may be moot.
Again, just a framework etc..
Facilitating a sign and trade for DDR where all parties were happy and where two of three parties had no leverage and eating Aminu’s 10mm for a far out FRP and a couple SRPs is where I equate the rest.
The Aminu part of the trade wasn't bad at all. Compare it to what OKC recently got (far out FRP) for taking on a bigger and longer contract (Favors), they even sent a 2nd the other way.
Spurs have assets and need to get on the phone and get very active on draft night.
The Sixers sent Bridges who was the 10th pick to the Phoenix Suns in a draft-night deal that netted Philadelphia the 16th pick which turned out to be Zhaire Smith and Miami's 2021 1st round pick.
I knew that was a bad trade for Phil.
So these type of deals happen on draft night.
Other years, I would be worried they'd be too conservative and stand still. But this time around, the approach has been different, trying to take advantage of every opportunity available, and I'm confident that will also happen at draft night. It would be a huge mistake not to.
Unfortunately the Spurs would have to change what they usually do on draft night and I don't think that's going to be easy for them to do. They are very conservative on draft night in making deals by what I've seen in past years.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions