NBA Trade Deadline 2023

[exstatic]

Yeah, I figure you'll have Giannis or Doncic on the Lakers by the second half of the decade, along those lines. Those FRPs aren't that appealing.

The Lakers signed Shaq in 1996, and LeBron in 2018. That’s it. Two big fish in 27 years. The trope that the Lakers sign any top FA they want is a myth. Lots of ring chaser complementary players, but only two big fish.

[cjw]

All your eggs? It’s a guaranteed first and we lose who that is hard to replace or meaningful for wins?

The path for Kyrie to LA with no Spurs is easy. Literally Russ for Kyrie.

The Nets would rather have Kyrie stay home than have to absorb Russ for Kyrie. They aren’t doing the deal without jettisoning Kyrie to a third team. Very few teams can make that work.

Agree that you’re not giving anyone away that is irreplaceable or in the team’s future plans. You aren’t losing Poeltl in the deal. What I’m saying is I think you can get a lot more than you think using that space to help multiple teams, along with relatively affordable vets that can contribute. Tre Jones, for one, could be a valuable backup PG for a contending team that lacks one (New Orleans?).

I’m only making that move with the Lakers and Nets if I can’t figure anything else out. It’s not a terrible outcome and could be a great asset eventually coming back. But I’d want to do better.

[cjw]

The Lakers signed Shaq in 1996, and LeBron in 2018. That’s it. Two big fish in 27 years. The trope that the Lakers sign any top FA they want is a myth. Lots of ring chaser complementary players, but only two big fish.

To be fair, they didn’t really have space because a certain guy wouldn’t take a pay cut!

[DPG21920]

Richardson & McDermott for Westbrook + an unprotected pick seems ok. But why add Tre & Zach? I'd say chances are not high that you can get a better player than Tre even with a better 2nd rounder than what was used for him (#41 I believe). I'd expect him to command ideally a couple good 2nds, at the very least one. As for Zach, he's on a cheap contract with low guaranteed money, he's a useful guy for some team. You don't need to put together a winning team for the young core to develop, but you can't rid yourself of every single guy with some experience, and they're not costing us lottery odds, so why get rid of them? It's a total tear down, I'm not totally opposed on paper if the price is too good, but I'm not sold this is the case here.

Because I don’t think Josh + McDermott fetch an unprotected first. You may not value that unprotected portion much, but I think it’s incredibly valuable and worth 2-3 lottery protected firsts given the cir stances (but I can see why some would disagree).

We are though a lot of the season already…those guys have served their purpose and SA would now replace them in off season using the money they would have paid to Doug anyways (15M) while keeping cap the same

[DPG21920]

The Nets would rather have Kyrie stay home than have to absorb Russ for Kyrie. They aren’t doing the deal without jettisoning Kyrie to a third team. Very few teams can make that work.

Agree that you’re not giving anyone away that is irreplaceable or in the team’s future plans. You aren’t losing Poeltl in the deal. What I’m saying is I think you can get a lot more than you think using that space to help multiple teams, along with relatively affordable vets that can contribute. Tre Jones, for one, could be a valuable backup PG for a contending team that lacks one (New Orleans?).

I’m only making that move with the Lakers and Nets if I can’t figure anything else out. It’s not a terrible outcome and could be a great asset eventually coming back. But I’d want to do better.

I get that…it’s definitely debatable. I’m just thirsty for an unprotected pick from LA seeing how trash they were for 6 years before LeBron bailed them out…

[KobesAchilles]

We getting Kyrie boys? Dude would launch us to contention once we draft Wemby. And don’t say about his drama bc we are starting Tre ffs

[spurraider21]

Spurs give up two good young players for a single draft pick? Do you work for ESPN?

2 solid young players + 2 established vets who have independent value (josh more than doug right now, though doug can probably be moved next offseason as an expiring).

its a lot to give up for 1 pick + eating westbrook imho

[heyheymymy]

WB has to bring a FRP alone just for the burden of his contract, the favor of furnishing financial space.

Then to get someone like JR I mean obvs debatable but cmon, for that I want another FRP, protected if you must. Doug maybe just a 2RP but I'd love to see someone bite with a FRP though Doug's value might be better next season in expiring. And Tre and Zach are more than just filler, not sure what they command but I'm not just handing them away so easily here.

I like where your mind is at but this gives too much away imo though maybe that's more realistic of the market/PATFO considerations currently than we know.

[spurraider21]

Because I don’t think Josh + McDermott fetch an unprotected first. You may not value that unprotected portion much, but I think it’s incredibly valuable and worth 2-3 lottery protected firsts given the cir stances (but I can see why some would disagree).

We are though a lot of the season already…those guys have served their purpose and SA would now replace them in off season using the money they would have paid to Doug anyways (15M) while keeping cap the same

spurs are already set to go into this offseason with something in the ball park of 75 mil in cap space. im not so worried about clearing up more cap room on a young rebuilding team. even if you give poeltl a market level deal you are still sitting at probably 55 mil in space to fill the roster. and its not like you are trying to sign overpriced vets to fill the linings of a championship contender

now if that unprotected first ends up being something like a top 5-6 pick... yeah it probably is worth those guys. but those laker picks are far out enough into the future where its still a lot to give up for just one pick

[Spurs Homer]

The Lakers signed Shaq in 1996, and LeBron in 2018. That’s it. Two big fish in 27 years. The trope that the Lakers sign any top FA they want is a myth. Lots of ring chaser complementary players, but only two big fish.

pretty sure they have gotten some other fish they didnt deserve…like maybe

kobe refusing to play for team that drafted him for a laker spot
unibrow (altho a ing bonafide china doll- pretty sure he was a big fish when betraying the pels to go to l.a.)
kawhi betraying the spurs for l.a. and altho he ended up on clippers - the lakers tampered like a mutha er to pry him outnof s.a.
karl malone and gary payton ring chasing

kareem from milwaukee
wilt from philly


im sure im forgetting a few dozen others that l.a. had no legit right to- but nabbed them anyways

[CGD]

Richardson & McDermott for Westbrook + an unprotected pick seems ok. But why add Tre & Zach? I'd say chances are not high that you can get a better player than Tre even with a better 2nd rounder than what was used for him (#41 I believe). I'd expect him to command ideally a couple good 2nds, at the very least one. As for Zach, he's on a cheap contract with low guaranteed money, he's a useful guy for some team. You don't need to put together a winning team for the young core to develop, but you can't rid yourself of every single guy with some experience, and they're not costing us lottery odds, so why get rid of them? It's a total tear down, I'm not totally opposed on paper if the price is too good, but I'm not sold this is the case here.

I agree, dont see the need to include Tre or Collins. I do this deal though:

BKN: Jak, Doug, Rich
LAL: Irving
SAS: Brick 27FRP + 28SWAP + 29FRP

*I'd use that stupid CHA pick strategically to get this over the finish line if needed.

[DPG21920]

spurs are already set to go into this offseason with something in the ball park of 75 mil in cap space. im not so worried about clearing up more cap room on a young rebuilding team. even if you give poeltl a market level deal you are still sitting at probably 55 mil in space to fill the roster. and its not like you are trying to sign overpriced vets to fill the linings of a championship contender

now if that unprotected first ends up being something like a top 5-6 pick... yeah it probably is worth those guys. but those laker picks are far out enough into the future where its still a lot to give up for just one pick

I get it but it’s not a lot to give up IMO. They arent stars nor hard to replace. It’s just seemingly “a lot” because of the volume especially when we know Josh for sure is walking anyways next year.

The cap space point if fair, but like I said I think its more about being able to replace Doug/Josh with Dougs money anyways so you really arent “trading” them. If you can get 2 new Doug/Josh’s for just Dougs money, then you functionally only traded Zach + Tre for that pick right? Does not have to be literally Doug and Josh in those spots for mentorship.

It’s like trading 2 players in fantasy football for one stud (the Lakers pick) knowing you can get a guy off of waivers that does everything the guys you traded do.

[heyheymymy]

Pau Gasol for Kwame Brown lol

Yeah Javaris Crittenton really levels that trade out talent wise

FTL

[k830713]

https://fanspo.com/nba/s/spurs/trade...xb_p/big-trade

[heyheymymy]

Oh the qualifier there was FA to LAL specifically and yeah all facts but you don't really need FAs when you're pulling heist trades like that Gasol deal

[DPG21920]

I get it but it’s not a lot to give up IMO. They arent stars nor hard to replace. It’s just seemingly “a lot” because of the volume especially when we know Josh for sure is walking anyways next year.

The cap space point if fair, but like I said I think its more about being able to replace Doug/Josh with Dougs money anyways so you really arent “trading” them. If you can get 2 new Doug/Josh’s for just Dougs money, then you functionally only traded Zach + Tre for that pick right? Does not have to be literally Doug and Josh in those spots for mentorship.

It’s like trading 2 players in fantasy football for one stud (the Lakers pick) knowing you can get a guy off of waivers that does everything the guys you traded do.

Let me frame it this way - would you do this trade:’

Outgoing: Doug + Josh + Zach + Tre

Incoming: Lakers unprotected 1st + JyMchal Green + Austin Rivers

[spurraider21]

I get it but it’s not a lot to give up IMO. They arent stars nor hard to replace. It’s just seemingly “a lot” because of the volume especially when we know Josh for sure is walking anyways next year.

yeah im not necessarily concerned with the quan y. but these guys should have more individual value. Tre looks like a low end starter/high end backup pg. That has value. Zollins has rehabilitated his value quite a bit and looks like he will be quite the bargain at his salary next season. richardson probably has borderline first round pick value to a contender. and mcdermott may have comparable value to a contender next year. maybe 2 seconds. you are flipping all that for a single 1 and banking on the lakers being bad in something like 4 or 6 years from now. on top of doing them the solid of eating westbrook's contract to facilitate the deal, which itself has value.

The cap space point if fair, but like I said I think its more about being able to replace Doug/Josh with Dougs money anyways so you really arent “trading” them. If you can get 2 new Doug/Josh’s for just Dougs money, then you functionally only traded Zach + Tre for that pick right? Does not have to be literally Doug and Josh in those spots for mentorship.

because rather than using doug's money to sign another doug, i'd rather squeeze a pick out of doug

[The Truth #6]

This is actually really good news for the Spurs... the kind of news they needed with the market kind of fizzling out. Spurs are the only team left who can facilitate such a trade.

Cap Space storage units have immediate availability, come on down to rent yours today.

Hard to say, but things could implode quickly in Brooklyn, where KD now wants out also, and then everything really might open up.

[CGD]

Let me frame it this way - would you do this trade:’

Outgoing: Doug + Josh + Zach + Tre

Incoming: Lakers unprotected 1st + JyMchal Green + Austin Rivers

You forgot the most important part of your framework, which is eating Bricks deal. That alone is worth the pick.

[The Truth #6]

Kyrie in LA will bring a ton of bad press from the LA Jewish community. That will be interesting to see how that plays out. Probably lots of PR nonsense to smooth things over.

[baseline bum]

The Lakers signed Shaq in 1996, and LeBron in 2018. That’s it. Two big fish in 27 years. The trope that the Lakers sign any top FA they want is a myth. Lots of ring chaser complementary players, but only two big fish.

But they have had a ton of top talent force trades there. Chamberlain, Abdul-Jabbar, Bryant, Howard, Davis for example.

[cjw]

Let me frame it this way - would you do this trade:’

Outgoing: Doug + Josh + Zach + Tre

Incoming: Lakers unprotected 1st + JyMchal Green + Austin Rivers

In a vacuum sure

But life doesn’t exist in a vacuum. There are 29 other teams that don’t have what the Spurs do - cap space. A trade that uses ALL OF IT alone is worth a FRP in this market. Let alone getting other assets back too

[DPG21920]

yeah im not necessarily concerned with the quan y. but these guys should have more individual value. Tre looks like a low end starter/high end backup pg. That has value. Zollins has rehabilitated his value quite a bit and looks like he will be quite the bargain at his salary next season. richardson probably has borderline first round pick value to a contender. and mcdermott may have comparable value to a contender next year. maybe 2 seconds. you are flipping all that for a single 1 and banking on the lakers being bad in something like 4 or 6 years from now. on top of doing them the solid of eating westbrook's contract to facilitate the deal, which itself has value.


because rather than using doug's money to sign another doug, i'd rather squeeze a pick out of doug

I think if you break it down between the 4 players: if you did individual trades or different combos you could get at best: 2 lottery protected 1sts and 2 2nds. Do you agree? If you do agree, what do you value more: 2 lottery protected firsts + 2 2nds or 1 fully unprotected 1st?

I can see both arguments but I personally value the unprotected first. Even a shot 25% shot at a top 3 pick is massive vs knowing at best you get 2 pick 15s + 2 2nds.

[DPG21920]

You forgot the most important part of your framework, which is eating Bricks deal. That alone is worth the pick.

It adds no money to SA truly beyond what they are paying anyways. They are sending out Doug/Zach/Tre/Josh and are under the floor. Not only that, they actually get off of Dougs money too which while not “important” is a win.

[DPG21920]

In a vacuum sure

But life doesn’t exist in a vacuum. There are 29 other teams that don’t have what the Spurs do - cap space. A trade that uses ALL OF IT alone is worth a FRP in this market. Let alone getting other assets back too

No - 29 other teams DO NOT have cap space.