Woj: Pacers make pick swap trade with Nuggets

[Scoot McGroot]

Read on Twitter

?s=61&t=4P34sFh22Otrr6CybjJQ_g

Read on Twitter

?s=61&t=4P34sFh22Otrr6CybjJQ_g

[Scoot McGroot]

I LOVE it. Only trade down 8 spots in the 2nd to turn one of the possible worst firsts (at 29) into a future first and better balance picks? Awesome.

[Pacers Forever]

I LOVE it. Only trade down 8 spots in the 2nd to turn one of the possible worst firsts (at 29) into a future first and better balance picks? Awesome.

Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t that mean we’re getting the worst possible first round pick next year after the Nuggets win it all again ? Plus trading down 8 spots in the 2nd ?

[Scoot McGroot]

I LOVE it. Only trade down 8 spots in the 2nd to turn one of the possible worst firsts (at 29) into a future first and better balance picks? Awesome.

Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t that mean we’re getting the worst possible first round pick next year after the Nuggets win it all again ? Plus trading down 8 spots in the 2nd ?

Maybe. But draft order is based on regular season finish. And this year, Denver had 27.

It also keeps the asset tradeable, rather than rushing to use it before it’s selected. It’s a great deal, for both sides.

[Scoot McGroot]

Wait! Just got word that Denver’s pick next year isn’t part of this. It’s just the exact first they just got via trade, so Indy is getting worst of LAC/Utah/Houston/OKC.

So, big win for Indy.

[Pacers Forever]

I LOVE it. Only trade down 8 spots in the 2nd to turn one of the possible worst firsts (at 29) into a future first and better balance picks? Awesome.

Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t that mean we’re getting the worst possible first round pick next year after the Nuggets win it all again ? Plus trading down 8 spots in the 2nd ?

Maybe. But draft order is based on regular season finish. And this year, Denver had 27.



It also keeps the asset tradeable, rather than rushing to use it before it’s selected. It’s a great deal, for both sides.

Feels like a win for the Nuggets and a postponement of the inevitable bad first round pick. Maybe we can move it next year for a positive result.

I hope we now sell #40 since it’s way out of my useful player range.

[Scoot McGroot]

Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t that mean we’re getting the worst possible first round pick next year after the Nuggets win it all again ? Plus trading down 8 spots in the 2nd ?

Maybe. But draft order is based on regular season finish. And this year, Denver had 27.



It also keeps the asset tradeable, rather than rushing to use it before it’s selected. It’s a great deal, for both sides.

Feels like a win for the Nuggets and a postponement of the inevitable bad first round pick. Maybe we can move it next year for a positive result.

I hope we now sell #40 since it’s way out of my useful player range.

How good do you think LAC, Houston, Utah, and OKC are going to be that you assume it’ll be a bad first next year? Denver’s first isn’t part of it.


Edit: also, I bet the guy you wanted at 32 may still be available at 40. Remember, teams all have dynamically different draft boards and needs, so guys will always surprise you into the second.

[Pacers Forever]

Wait! Just got word that Denver’s pick next year isn’t part of this. It’s just the exact first they just got via trade, so Indy is getting worst of LAC/Utah/Houston/OKC.

So, big win for Indy.

Much better because LAC, Utah probably rebuilding and Houston and OKC aren’t going to make a huge jump.

[Pacers Forever]

Maybe. But draft order is based on regular season finish. And this year, Denver had 27.



It also keeps the asset tradeable, rather than rushing to use it before it’s selected. It’s a great deal, for both sides.

Feels like a win for the Nuggets and a postponement of the inevitable bad first round pick. Maybe we can move it next year for a positive result.

I hope we now sell #40 since it’s way out of my useful player range.

How good do you think LAC, Houston, Utah, and OKC are going to be that you assume it’ll be a bad first next year? Denver’s first isn’t part of it.


Edit: also, I bet the guy you wanted at 32 may still be available at 40. Remember, teams all have dynamically different draft boards and needs, so guys will always surprise you into the second.

I posted before you clarified the situation so much better now for the future first round pick.

[pacers33granger]

Absolutely love this. We still have 26 and only moved down to 40 where we could get whoever the front office may have taken at 32 anyways.

Most importantly we didn't sit on all these picks we can't use. Remember what happened to Boston who ended up wasting two firsts on Yabs and Hunter? There's no guarantee we'd get anything better offered at the draft and now we have a likely better pick next year as a trade chip or another late flyer.

Sent from my SM-S901U using RealGM mobile app

[boomershadow]

Seems like a good move

[Wizop]

I said this in the other threads, but now the draft picks and roster spots match both for regular contracts and two-ways.

[Scoot McGroot]

I said this in the other threads, but now the draft picks and roster spots match both for regular contracts and two-ways.

40 probably still isn’t a two way. Unless they’re injured and rehabbing?

[Wizop]

I said this in the other threads, but now the draft picks and roster spots match both for regular contracts and two-ways.

40 probably still isn’t a two way. Unless they’re injured and rehabbing?

perhaps although time will tell what affect the third two-way has. if not a two-way, there's also the stash option.

[Tom White]

Do we know anything about the picks Denver included that originated from other teams? I guess what I'm asking is, was the pick the Nuggets got from____(name one of those four teams) the worst of maybe a couple picks that team had? Or is it that team's own pick?

I am probably just picking at nits here, but mainly only for the sake of curiosity.

[Scoot McGroot]

Do we know anything about the picks Denver included that originated from other teams? I guess what I'm asking is, was the pick the Nuggets got from____(name one of those four teams) the worst of maybe a couple picks that team had? Or is it that team's own pick?

I am probably just picking at nits here, but mainly only for the sake of curiosity.

We are getting the pick from a Denver exactly as they got it from OKC: the worst pick of Houston (1-4 protected), Utah (1-10 protected), LAC (unprotected) and OKC (unprotected).

[basketballwacko2]

Absolutely love this. We still have 26 and only moved down to 40 where we could get whoever the front office may have taken at 32 anyways.

Most importantly we didn't sit on all these picks we can't use. Remember what happened to Boston who ended up wasting two firsts on Yabs and Hunter? There's no guarantee we'd get anything better offered at the draft and now we have a likely better pick next year as a trade chip or another late flyer.

Sent from my SM-S901U using RealGM mobile app

Sorry I don't recall who "Yabs" is.

[Tom White]

Sorry I don't recall who "Yabs" is.

That may have, inadvertently, been the point of the post. He was not a memorable player?

[Scoot McGroot]

Sorry I don't recall who "Yabs" is.

That may have, inadvertently, been the point of the post. He was not a memorable player?

He's already back in Europe playing, but it was Guerschon Yabusele.

[Grang33r]

Feels like a win for the Nuggets and a postponement of the inevitable bad first round pick. Maybe we can move it next year for a positive result.

I hope we now sell #40 since it’s way out of my useful player range.

I had hoped the Pacers would flip one of those picks for a proven player but this is next best thing. This pick figures to be somewhere around 20-22 next year. They can package both picks next year to move up or pick two guys or trade one of them for a player. Really smart trade by the Pacers imo.

The Pacers were never going to make 5 picks tomorrow, so something had to be done. I would even bet they don't make 4 selections. 2 is most likely IMO but i could see them staying with 3 picks.