Reply With Quote
I don’t think Mitc can start alongside Fox but, DJ would fit there pretty good..
It's probably going to cost you Murray + 9 to move up to 4. Targeting 7 would be less costly.
At 7 you can get Murray, Sharpe or Mathurin whichever one is left.
Probably will cost you Murray and 25 or 20 to get 7.
Most trades are not going to be clear cut winning trades on your end, there has to be some pain in what you'll be giving up to make it worthwhile for the other team to even make a trade.
Last edited by rascal; 06-04-2022 at 02:23 PM.
I don’t think Mitc can start alongside Fox but, DJ would fit there pretty good..
I wouldn't pay that price...if they want more than a young Allstar on a reasonable contract I'd pass.
Then you won't be making any trades. Trades have to hurt a little on your side to make it worth it for the other team.
Possibly but i think youre miscalculating the value here, DJ + 9 is an overpay so that wouldn't hurt any on their side and all the pain would be on ours...
FWIW: in my scenario, Jordan not moving both picks. He's swapping 13 for 20 and 38 and moving 15 for Poeltl. Hornets receive Poeltl, Richardson, 20, 38 and get out from under Hayward deal. Spurs get 13 and 15, but have to take on Hayward's contract.
Just curious... how do you know Banchero is still there at 4, Duren at 9, Dieng at 13, Procida at 20 and alondes at 38?
And it's fun and all to trade up and down to target specific players but how do you they're still there? And what do you do if they're not?
You don't pull the trigger on the trade unless he is...you get the parameters of the deal in place and make the trade when Sacramento is in the clock..
As for the other picks if Duren is gone take Dieng at 9 and Mark Williams at 13...at 20 of Procida is gone then there are several other guys in that range that would be attractive.
There's always a risk in trading down, because even if you make a move contingent on the player you want being there, you have to first take the player the other team wants, and if your player is not on the board by the time the other team picks, the most you can do is keep their preferred player (who may not be yours).
Case in point: say we want to trade no. 9 for no. 13 + no. 15. Charlotte does this to get Duren, we do it to get Jalen Williams + Eason. The first thing that would have to happen, is for us to pick Duren. Then we wait until Charlotte is on the clock, hoping for our targets (Eason and Jalen Williams). If they're gone, the most we can do is not go through with the trade, but we don't get a draft do over: we're still stuck with their pick for no. 9 (Duren).
Scenarios in which trading down can be worth it:
1) The player you're trading away was your pick anyway
2) Though not being your preferred pick, you think there are similar value alternatives available.
3) You're about certain the worst case scenario won't materialize (letting go of a player you really want for someone you don't, only to back down later when your target further down isn't available).
In this case, I believe some combination of 2) and 3) could apply. To be more specific, it could play out like this: suppose we're high on Mathurin and Daniels, but not so much on the rest. In that case you could have an understanding with Charlotte to trade the picks, contingent on your main guys not being there by no. 9. If Mathurin/Daniels are there, no deal, you use no. 9 to take one of them.
But if Mathurin/Daniels are off the board by 9 (seems like more and more likely) you pick Duren for Charlotte, knowing that there are only 3 picks till 13 (10, 11 and 12) and more than 3 players you like (Sochan, Eason, Johnny Davis, Jalen Williams, Malaki Branham), and you know some of them won't be picked in that range (Eason) and the rest may or may not (Sochan, Johnny Davis, Malaki Branham, Jalen Williams). So, worst case scenario, you take the 2 players you least prefer in that group, which would not be a big deal if players 9-15 are roughly in the same tier in your eyes.
This is one scenario where it would make sense to trade down, without paying too steep a price. All in all, it's definitely a leap of faith, but depending on the cir stances it may or may not be worth it.
Last edited by Ariel; 06-04-2022 at 04:41 PM.
This ain't half bad, Mo. In fact I like it, though I'm not as high as most of the board on Duren.
There are no post contingent trades on draft day. If we decide to trade 9 for whatever, it’s a done deal when we pick for them at 9. That player is theirs, and we pick what is available at 13 and 15.
That happened in 2018 with Atlanta and Dallas. Atlanta had no. 3, and Dallas had no. 5. I specifically remember that it was stated that Atlanta decided to go ahead with the trade only if Trae Young was available at no. 5.
In any case, I don't any problem with agreeing with a team to a deal in the terms I laid out, delaying it being formalized until you get to the latter pick. If both teams are good with it, they go ahead. If not, they don't. The only difference is at which time you formalize the trade (in the case you mention by the first pick, in mine by the latter).
Last edited by Ariel; 06-04-2022 at 05:14 PM.
That would indeed make more sense than just trading down and losing 9 for 13 and 15 without guratantees you'll like what is till available... With 4 and 9 you have more probabilites to get solid players...
Problem is I really don't think those trades are realistic... As another poster mentioned, #4 would cost you Murray and 9 (or 20 in a rosy world). Same for Charlotte #13, no way Poetl + 25 would do it, not even #20 probalby.
So, there was no deal in place until Dallas got Trae. What happens if CHA wants a player at 9 who SA wouldn’t touch? It’s not workable with two picks that you have to wait 4 and 6 slots for.
It wouldn't be like that. No final deal is made until 9, simply an understanding. If your guy is there (Mathurin or Daniels), you don't go through with it. If he isn't, then you formalize the deal, pick their guy (Duren) and take your chances on 13 and 15. Also, there are only 3 picks to 13 (10, 11 and 12) and 4 picks till 15 (10,11,12 and 14).
Sexton is an SG in a PG's body. He'd be a poor fit next to Murray because the physical advantages Murray has over most PG's would vanish primarily defending SG's/wings. He'd be a poor fit sans Murray too because his lack of play making would be exposed.
I'd have no interest investing heavily (asset wise, financially and role) in sub star small guard (coming off of a significant injury, no less).
I get the issues with fit w/o Murray but, I think between Sexton and Banchero they'd be fine initiating offense. As for Murray, I think he defends 2's and 3's much better than he defends the PG position.
On Banchero there’s been recent rumors about OKC and HOU liking Ivey, which could all be smoke but still that’s where the Banchero at 4 probably comes from. Also some analysts are saying this is a “Big 2” class suggesting Banchero is probably more firmly in the next tier with Ivy and Sharpe.
On Duren, he is very likely to still be there at 9. It feels like 5-8 are firming up between mathurin, sharpe, dyson, and Murray, though, order remains unclear.
Yeah, which leaves us with Duren, Davis, Sochan, Williams, Dieng.....for the 9th pick.
And Griffin tbh.
Griffon and Baldwin are two players and probably the only players in the entire draft that I would hate for us to pick
I'm not too high on Banchero. Rather have Sharpe, Murray or Ivey.
The 9th pick is where the draft falls off the cliff.
That's why the Spurs need to aggressively look to trade up a couple of spots.
Lots of (serious) mock drafts include different players among the top 9. I bet you might not find your top 9 players in the actual draft.
That’s not even remotely true. There’s a “level” that extends 12-14 picks from the top 4. Somewhere around 18 is where the talent drops off.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions