We’ve got a Spurs trade rumors thread, but I thought I’d start one for ideas we might have and not necessarily just commenting on things that are already rumored in the press.
It’s 39 degrees and raining here and I’m pretty bored. I’m more into the draft than trades but, I’m taking a break today from looking at game film and thought I’d spitball through a couple types of trades that might make sense between now and the deadline. Looking at this deadline we don’t really want to do anything to lower our draft pick, but I do think we ‘should’ want to provide some balance just to help Wembanyama out a little bit and provide some structure. So, here’s a thought or two in it’s infancy.
#1- Giving them back their pick
To the Hornets- McDermott, Graham, Malaki, and the Cha 1st
To the Spurs- NSJ + Hayward
The thought here is that GH provides balance in the SL that we currently don’t have and he’s expiring. I think he would go a long way towards calming things down and getting players in a better position to simply play the game than what we’re doing now. NSJ is hitting 54% from 3 and if you’ve read anything I wrote about the draft you know I like his potential a lot. He also adds some athleticism to the roster. Why does Charolotte do this? Well, they don’t if a contender makes them a stronger offer for GH, but it’s going to be challenging for some teams to match salaries and our offer is better for them than standing pat. They would probably like to control their pick so it frees up future picks by removing the hold as well.
#2- Lakers, Bulls, Spurs
To the Bulls-McDermott, Graham, Prince, Christie 2024 & 2027 LA 2nds plus the Spurs Cha & Chi picks
To the Lakers- LaVine
To the Spurs- Russell & Reaves
This trade must happen after the 15th of this month. The thought here really comes down to LA getting desperate enough to do something before the deadline. We know the Bulls really want to move LaVine and there’s no market for him other than LA. The Bulls do this trade all day long. The Spurs though, why would we do this trade? Well, Russell isn’t a favorite of mine, but his contract makes this much easier to stomach. He provides stability in the SL and can space the floor. His vision and passing would make things easier on VW in the short term. Reaves is somebody we considered offering a contract this summer, so there’s obviously interest there. We’d be looking at a lineup of:
Russell, Tre, Wesley
Vassel, Reaves, Branham
Champ, KJ
Sochan, Cedi, Mamu, Sidy
Wembanyama, Collins, Barlow
That’s a much better and balanced lineup than we are trotting out there now and Reaves fits in a longer-term view. This gives us plenty of options going into the summer as well. Does LA get desperate enough to get Lavine? Probably not, but it’s not out of the question with a 39-year-old Lebron if they can make a splash anywhere else. I don’t think they really want to include any future 1st’s, so it’ll be hard for them to get a bigger name.
Feel free to poke holes in these or improve on them.. Like I said, trades aren’t my thing as much as the draft is and these thoughts are just in their infancy…
Would love the CHA deal if we were confident we could resign GH for something like 2/25. I think he'd fill an immediate hole at the starting SF and give us some vet presence. NSJ gives us another roll of the dice at a PG.
I do wonder if Hayward makes us "too good" however (in the vein of your comment of not making any move that lowers our draft pick)
my admiration for Reaves is known
no shot lakers move him in a deal like this imo. i think they view him as nearly untouchable and i dont think lavine is the type of player they would acquiesce and move him for
I don't think Hayward has enough left to really 'lift' a team at this point. He's just solid. On NSJ, I believe in that kid. He's got the tool kit, he just needs the right environment. He's has more upside and downside than Black imo..
I've seen several media reports suggesting that he's not untouchable at this point, but as i said, it'll come down to the getting desperate enough to go get Lavine..
Moses Moody from the Golden gots? Price is right. Age is great matchup 21. I like his hustle too.
Shooting the rock at 48/35.
Could Pop schmooze his wine drinking boifriend for a deal?
Or is Pop always the bottom in that relationship?
He's probably a bottom, but Moody can be gotten if we want him for sure.
I don't see a downside at this point.
Triple that if they will take McForbesbot.
Can't really see how the Hornets trade Hayward and Smith for two seconds and crap and no way the Lakers would be that desperate for Lavine.
Was really hoping to see the Spurs trade up and take a flier on Smith when he dropped into the mid 20s. I would have offered someone the Charlotte pick for him.
The hayward trade was for their own 1st back. Now, sure it could be two 2nds in a couple years but their future first is tied up and doesn't have the flexibility to be traded until they convey. This gives them control of their pick and the flexibility that goes with it. As for the Lakers, I would trade for Lavine if i were them, but alot of press people think they will and a few Hollywood execs I work with think they're considering him pretty strongly.
Yup... I still would offer it...
The Charlotte pick is worth two seconds and an unlikely shot at a mid round FRP. It's not valueless but it doesn't have great value.
Yup... probably has more value to Charlotte than most teams because it lifts restrictions off of next years 1st if they have it back..
Since it's doubtful the Hornets would care that much about the likely 2 2nds to add some salary for next season, they'd have to value Branham significantly more than Smith Jr. (who already looks better) for that trade to be appealing to them.
The Lakers won't so much as consider Reaves without Caruso and they're already thin on the perimeter, so 3.5 rotational players for 1 is untenable.
Even though the LaVine trade will swing more toward salary dump than assets on the pendulum, the Bulls still need more than that to sell to ownership/fans.
Russell is the virtual an hesis of a Spur and Reaves would cost more than the Bulls pick.
Thanks for getting some interesting discussion going OP
Wondering if Spurs could get involved in facilitating a Kuminga trade with some considerations or incentives back to them for their trouble.
1 month from the trade deadline. Time to start heating up the espn trade machine lol
Scary how our stupid front office is in charge of doing the trading. Can they get it wright, well wrong...
Actually looking at the salary cap table I'm reminded that SA met the cap and hover right around there so any facilitation will have to include salary going out as well.
McDermott and Graham represent over 24MM of expiring money and are both players seemingly not in Spurs long-term plans
It's my pleasure. Who do you think would be interested in Kuminga?
hayward is always hurt and is too old for this roster. pass.
Hopefully not the Spurs since dude shoots 27% from the three despite all the gravity Curry creates to get him open shots.
Yeah lol I just don't really see any likely destination for Kuminga
I wonder if MEM might like it if they catch fire with the return of Ja and see a little more depth as necessary to push for postseason. Especially since Brandon Clarke is out for the season though Kuminga is an inch shorter. Plus general big depth with Adam's also out for the season.
Grizz also kinda like developing potential diamonds in the rough although I'm not sure they would like the fit with Kuminga specifically nor have many good surplus assets to trade with so it may not be worth their while.
He's just a guy to provide stability until the end of tbe season then his contract expires...not a long-term piece
Yep... not a guy we should want...there's athleticism there, but not much bbiq or work ethic
I want some affordable vets who know how to play on this team. Spurs don't have Presti building them a ridiculous war chest of young guys. After Victor, Devin, Keldon, and Tre it's pretty much crap all the way down.
There are currently 52 users browsing this thread. (5 members and 47 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
