Trade Talk (Part 15): Trade Deadline Day (and onwards!)

[cmoss84]

Why is he a FA and not draftable? Or did I miss something?

Nevermind...he's a freshman?

[winforlose]

Why is he a FA and not draftable? Or did I miss something?

Nevermind...he's a freshman?

Long story short. Bronny is 19 and not very good. To get him drafted in the first round LBJ promised to ditch LAL and sign for a minimum for at least one year to play with Bronny. At which point he announced that he plans to retire. So if Bronny declares for this draft no one will draft Bronny for Bronny. They will draft a scrub who will never play anything but the occasional garbage minutes, to get 1 or 2 cheap years of LBJ. Thus, LBJ has poisoned his son’s career before it ever began. If Bronny stays in college and his dad gets hurt or loses a step, then Bronny cannot hide behind his dad and likely doesn’t get drafted and may never get a real shot. It is a lose, lose for him.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/lakers-willing-to-draft-bronny-james-to-keep-lebron-james-in-los-angeles-next-season-report/ar-BB1ilmX1

[BlacJacMac]

I have no idea about the tampering rules. If LBJ opts out ahead of the draft (not sure of the timing on that,) then he can negotiate with teams. His promise was a dumb one because now teams could draft Bronny to manipulate Lebron. Would they, I don’t know. What I do know, is I would gladly trade multiple seconds to trade up and take Bronny if it meant LBJ was a minimum player on this team next year. Can you even imagine how damn good we would be?

I am sure teams will know LBJ's intention thru All Star games or LBJ's second cousin. I love to see it happen but it's not going to happen. As I mentioned earlier, most likely would be LAL drafts Bronny with their own pick or they trade for a 1st pick, then is MIA, GSW, CLE, NYK, ..., SAS, OKC, MIN and POR.

Let’s assume you are right that the camp does a backdoor negotiation. Where does LBJ want Bronny to be? Does he want him on the Lakers, GSW, ect… because LBJ has 2 or 3 years left at most. At any time he could go down and that is all she wrote for him. We could also see him slow down and lose even more of his game. My point is this is more long term for Bronny than for him. He also might see the light and want to leave LAL if they lose in the play in. I doubt he comes here, I just hope he goes East if he doesn’t.

Yes, he wants him in LA.

LeBron didn't go to the Lakers because they were the premiere team with the best chance to win. They had missed the Playoffs 5 straight years before he went there.

He went because his wife wanted them to live in LA and he wanted to be more involved day-to-day with SpringHill Entertainment.

Once there, he was able to basically force the AD trade, but he was going to do something similar anywhere.

[winforlose]

I am sure teams will know LBJ's intention thru All Star games or LBJ's second cousin. I love to see it happen but it's not going to happen. As I mentioned earlier, most likely would be LAL drafts Bronny with their own pick or they trade for a 1st pick, then is MIA, GSW, CLE, NYK, ..., SAS, OKC, MIN and POR.

Let’s assume you are right that the camp does a backdoor negotiation. Where does LBJ want Bronny to be? Does he want him on the Lakers, GSW, ect… because LBJ has 2 or 3 years left at most. At any time he could go down and that is all she wrote for him. We could also see him slow down and lose even more of his game. My point is this is more long term for Bronny than for him. He also might see the light and want to leave LAL if they lose in the play in. I doubt he comes here, I just hope he goes East if he doesn’t.

Yes, he wants him in LA.

LeBron didn't go to the Lakers because they were the premiere team with the best chance to win. They had missed the Playoffs 5 straight years before he went there.

He went because his wife wanted them to live in LA and he wanted to be more involved day-to-day with SpringHill Entertainment.

Once there, he was able to basically force the AD trade, but he was going to do something similar anywhere.

Rumors are that Lebron might want out. Rumors are also swirling that LAL is worried about that.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/lakers-willing-to-draft-bronny-james-to-keep-lebron-james-in-los-angeles-next-season-report/ar-BB1ilmX1

[TimberKat]

A degree is something you can finish anytime. All his credits transfer. If he comes out after his father retires, he will average less than a million in the G or half the minimum as a two way best case. If he comes out now, he could make 10 million on nepotism + his father’s coattails. Given the choice would you rather be a below average college ball player then a career G league guy, or make 10 million and have a chance in the NBA?

I suspect the experience of going to college is not the same as an adult not playing basketball than being a teen/early 20 something playing D1 ball.

I agree with you about the money. I just don’t know if that’s his priority. He’s already made money just be Bronny. Plus Lebron is a billionaire. Just depends on what he wants. Who knows if he actually wants to play with Lebron. Most celebrity kids want to carve their own path, not be a nepotism joke.

Either way. I’m sure if he does declare, Rich Paul will do all they can do to steer him to a preferred destination.

His dad made him a joke the moment he promised to take a minimum and play for whatever team drafts him. From that moment onward no matter where he is picked, no one will ever believe he got there on his own merit. Worse, if his father doesn’t live up to the deal, the team could take it out on Bronny. It was a selfish, stupid, ridiculous move by LBJ and his son is forever the victim of it.

The above being true, if Bronny wants a shot in the NBA it is probably gonna be while his dad is playing. He could improve and build a career, (even as a backup,) or flame out with enough money to live comfortably while pursuing any career he wants (including amateur basketball in the G league.)

Finally, which is better, relying on his father’s fortune, or exploiting his connections to get a job paying 10 million plus. Granted half of that will go to taxes and his team (agent, lawyer, ect..) But 5 million for four years work is probably the best he could possibly do at his current age. I gotta believe he will want that, no matter how it happens. 1.25 million after tax per year is an insane amount of money for any kid in their earlier 20s.

Let's just give LBJ the benefit of the doubt for a second. Isn't it a wonderful thing if you could play with your son on an NBA team? Some would do it for free let alone NBA minimal. I think that was the intent of his statement. Now, that may not apply to Wilt Chamberlain.

[winforlose]

I suspect the experience of going to college is not the same as an adult not playing basketball than being a teen/early 20 something playing D1 ball.

I agree with you about the money. I just don’t know if that’s his priority. He’s already made money just be Bronny. Plus Lebron is a billionaire. Just depends on what he wants. Who knows if he actually wants to play with Lebron. Most celebrity kids want to carve their own path, not be a nepotism joke.

Either way. I’m sure if he does declare, Rich Paul will do all they can do to steer him to a preferred destination.

His dad made him a joke the moment he promised to take a minimum and play for whatever team drafts him. From that moment onward no matter where he is picked, no one will ever believe he got there on his own merit. Worse, if his father doesn’t live up to the deal, the team could take it out on Bronny. It was a selfish, stupid, ridiculous move by LBJ and his son is forever the victim of it.

The above being true, if Bronny wants a shot in the NBA it is probably gonna be while his dad is playing. He could improve and build a career, (even as a backup,) or flame out with enough money to live comfortably while pursuing any career he wants (including amateur basketball in the G league.)

Finally, which is better, relying on his father’s fortune, or exploiting his connections to get a job paying 10 million plus. Granted half of that will go to taxes and his team (agent, lawyer, ect..) But 5 million for four years work is probably the best he could possibly do at his current age. I gotta believe he will want that, no matter how it happens. 1.25 million after tax per year is an insane amount of money for any kid in their earlier 20s.

Let's just give LBJ the benefit of the doubt for a second. Isn't it a wonderful thing if you could play with your son on an NBA team? Some would do it for free let alone NBA minimal. I think that was the intent of his statement. Now, that may not apply to Wilt Chamberlain.

The sentiment is fine but the truth is he could have done that anyway. He is over 38, so all contracts are 1 year deals. All he had to do is wait till his son was drafted and go there. If he really wants Bronny in LA then only tell them and let LA go get him. LBJ dicked around with the draft by making it public and offering himself on a minimum. Now his son is tainted goods and this conversation is happening.

[Klomp]

Apologies to KGdaBom, but I'm going to talk about trading draft picks again...

I did some early calculations, and if we combined our #28 pick and he #37 (MEM), the standard value we could get back is #22.

I was actually thinking TC should trade back on the high pick and then trade back at least one more time from there. We have 3 available 2nds to trade and no firsts going forward. Getting 3 more seconds would be huge and we aren’t exactly in the market for players who take 2-3 years to develop. We will have Minott, Miller, Clarke, and the late 20s or even #30 pick to develop. That is not even mentioning Moore who is currently occupying a roster spot. I think we are fine adding assets instead of bodies.

I initially was leaning towards winforlose here, thinking more about the primary objective of a trade being cap/tax management. However, with the second apron likely inevitable, I wonder if I'm leaning back towards shrink's perspective.

First of all, with resources and avenues of adding talent being eliminated, I think getting up to get a better player is more beneficial than multiple stabs at lesser talents. Additionally, with the apron penalties, I'm thinking about the inability to take in more contracts than we send out. With the later first and a second, there's not much room to take back less money in a swap. Trading up doesn't create a lot extra room, but it is room nonetheless.

[BlacJacMac]

Apologies to KGdaBom, but I'm going to talk about trading draft picks again...

I did some early calculations, and if we combined our #28 pick and he #37 (MEM), the standard value we could get back is #22.

I was actually thinking TC should trade back on the high pick and then trade back at least one more time from there. We have 3 available 2nds to trade and no firsts going forward. Getting 3 more seconds would be huge and we aren’t exactly in the market for players who take 2-3 years to develop. We will have Minott, Miller, Clarke, and the late 20s or even #30 pick to develop. That is not even mentioning Moore who is currently occupying a roster spot. I think we are fine adding assets instead of bodies.

I initially was leaning towards winforlose here, thinking more about the primary objective of a trade being cap/tax management. However, with the second apron likely inevitable, I wonder if I'm leaning back towards shrink's perspective.

First of all, with resources and avenues of adding talent being eliminated, I think getting up to get a better player is more beneficial than multiple stabs at lesser talents. Additionally, with the apron penalties, I'm thinking about the inability to take in more contracts than we send out. With the later first and a second, there's not much room to take back less money in a swap. Trading up doesn't create a lot extra room, but it is room nonetheless.

I agree. With limited flexibility, I'd rather take a single big swing than a handful of smaller ones.

[winforlose]

Apologies to KGdaBom, but I'm going to talk about trading draft picks again...

I did some early calculations, and if we combined our #28 pick and he #37 (MEM), the standard value we could get back is #22.

I was actually thinking TC should trade back on the high pick and then trade back at least one more time from there. We have 3 available 2nds to trade and no firsts going forward. Getting 3 more seconds would be huge and we aren’t exactly in the market for players who take 2-3 years to develop. We will have Minott, Miller, Clarke, and the late 20s or even #30 pick to develop. That is not even mentioning Moore who is currently occupying a roster spot. I think we are fine adding assets instead of bodies.

I initially was leaning towards winforlose here, thinking more about the primary objective of a trade being cap/tax management. However, with the second apron likely inevitable, I wonder if I'm leaning back towards shrink's perspective.

First of all, with resources and avenues of adding talent being eliminated, I think getting up to get a better player is more beneficial than multiple stabs at lesser talents. Additionally, with the apron penalties, I'm thinking about the inability to take in more contracts than we send out. With the later first and a second, there's not much room to take back less money in a swap. Trading up doesn't create a lot extra room, but it is room nonetheless.

1. What is the value of moving up six spots in a bad draft? Or in other words how much more likely is 22 than 28 to be a rotation worth player.

2. Second round draft picks can be signed as two ways then bullied into Naz Reid contracts (Hinkie special.) Having a high second costs us nothing (cap/tax wise,) whereas a first does.

3. Firsts take a long time develop if at all. Look at Moore. We are stuck with them for 2 years and then have to blindly guess at year 3 before seeing them play in year 2.

A better plan is a draft night trade of 28 for multiple 2nds (we need to select the player on behalf of someone else,) then use the best of those 2nds to draft someone. We use the others to trade back to other years. Dump Nix and sign both 2nds to two ways. Now we have Clarke/2nd/2nd taking up no space and no cap. Then we sign a ring chaser or best available vet minimum in place of the first and they can be contributing next year when it matters.

[shrink]

I’m not advocating trading up or trading down. I just posted to give people an idea about how high trading up could get us.

The bottom line is that each draft if different, and players with the potential to help can exist at very different places. Maybe this is a draft where a shotgun approach with multiple picks in the second round find you talent. Perhaps a potential lottery player drops like Leonard Miller did - that would be a good time to combine picks and trade up. I trust Tim Connelly’s ability to find talent wherever it lands, as he done so well for many years, here and in Denver.

[BlacJacMac]

Apologies to KGdaBom, but I'm going to talk about trading draft picks again...

I was actually thinking TC should trade back on the high pick and then trade back at least one more time from there. We have 3 available 2nds to trade and no firsts going forward. Getting 3 more seconds would be huge and we aren’t exactly in the market for players who take 2-3 years to develop. We will have Minott, Miller, Clarke, and the late 20s or even #30 pick to develop. That is not even mentioning Moore who is currently occupying a roster spot. I think we are fine adding assets instead of bodies.

I initially was leaning towards winforlose here, thinking more about the primary objective of a trade being cap/tax management. However, with the second apron likely inevitable, I wonder if I'm leaning back towards shrink's perspective.

First of all, with resources and avenues of adding talent being eliminated, I think getting up to get a better player is more beneficial than multiple stabs at lesser talents. Additionally, with the apron penalties, I'm thinking about the inability to take in more contracts than we send out. With the later first and a second, there's not much room to take back less money in a swap. Trading up doesn't create a lot extra room, but it is room nonetheless.

1. What is the value of moving up six spots in a bad draft? Or in other words how much more likely is 22 than 28 to be a rotation worth player.

2. Second round draft picks can be signed as two ways then bullied into Naz Reid contracts (Hinkie special.) Having a high second costs us nothing (cap/tax wise,) whereas a first does.

3. Firsts take a long time develop if at all. Look at Moore. We are stuck with them for 2 years and then have to blindly guess at year 3 before seeing them play in year 2.

A better plan is a draft night trade of 28 for multiple 2nds (we need to select the player on behalf of someone else,) then use the best of those 2nds to draft someone. We use the others to trade back to other years. Dump Nix and sign both 2nds to two ways. Now we have Clarke/2nd/2nd taking up no space and no cap. Then we sign a ring chaser or best available vet minimum in place of the first and they can be contributing next year when it matters.

All 3 of those points are wild assumptions.

1. Lots of "good" and "bad" drafts turn out to be the opposite after they happen.
2. Bullying players into taking contracts is not a good look. And you can't guarantee that a player/agent will accept your terms.
3. Some do take years! Some don't at all. Moore was just a bad pick. I'm sure Miami and GS are very happy with their rookie 18th and 19th picks. Hell, I would be thrilled to have the 25th pick from this year's draft on our squad. At worst he'd be a great 3rd PG right now, at best he's our legit "PG of the Future."

I get that TC has a great rep for finding "diamonds in the rough", but so far all of ours are just potential. Miller, Minott, Clarke. None of them have proven they're NBA players.

If TC identifies a player in the early 20s, he should absolutely go for it. We need to start finding cheap quality over cheap quantity.

[Sealab2024]

It's so tough to project what a trade up could be worth because this draft could go so many ways. There's every chance guys that most had going in the lottery are hanging around in the twenties, if that's Connellys guy I say go get him. Otherwise trying to get value with guys at 28 who are supposed to be there isn't much different than picking 35th and 53rd instead. In terms of potential and value.

It's nice to say, but I trust Tim will figure it out.

[winforlose]

Apologies to KGdaBom, but I'm going to talk about trading draft picks again...



I initially was leaning towards winforlose here, thinking more about the primary objective of a trade being cap/tax management. However, with the second apron likely inevitable, I wonder if I'm leaning back towards shrink's perspective.

First of all, with resources and avenues of adding talent being eliminated, I think getting up to get a better player is more beneficial than multiple stabs at lesser talents. Additionally, with the apron penalties, I'm thinking about the inability to take in more contracts than we send out. With the later first and a second, there's not much room to take back less money in a swap. Trading up doesn't create a lot extra room, but it is room nonetheless.

1. What is the value of moving up six spots in a bad draft? Or in other words how much more likely is 22 than 28 to be a rotation worth player.

2. Second round draft picks can be signed as two ways then bullied into Naz Reid contracts (Hinkie special.) Having a high second costs us nothing (cap/tax wise,) whereas a first does.

3. Firsts take a long time develop if at all. Look at Moore. We are stuck with them for 2 years and then have to blindly guess at year 3 before seeing them play in year 2.

A better plan is a draft night trade of 28 for multiple 2nds (we need to select the player on behalf of someone else,) then use the best of those 2nds to draft someone. We use the others to trade back to other years. Dump Nix and sign both 2nds to two ways. Now we have Clarke/2nd/2nd taking up no space and no cap. Then we sign a ring chaser or best available vet minimum in place of the first and they can be contributing next year when it matters.

All 3 of those points are wild assumptions.

1. Lots of "good" and "bad" drafts turn out to be the opposite after they happen.
2. Bullying players into taking contracts is not a good look. And you can't guarantee that a player/agent will accept your terms.
3. Some do take years! Some don't at all. Moore was just a bad pick. I'm sure Miami and GS are very happy with their rookie 18th and 19th picks. Hell, I would be thrilled to have the 25th pick from this year's draft on our squad. At worst he'd be a great 3rd PG right now, at best he's our legit "PG of the Future."

I get that TC has a great rep for finding "diamonds in the rough", but so far all of ours are just potential. Miller, Minott, Clarke. None of them have proven they're NBA players.

If TC identifies a player in the early 20s, he should absolutely go for it. We need to start finding cheap quality over cheap quantity.

1. Again I ask what is the quality difference between 22 and 28? Historically I don’t think either position does well. As for draft quality, you could be right, but if everyone is acting as if this is a bad draft, (not wanting picks from it,) then there may be truth to it.

2. I literally have no idea what you’re talking about. It is done all the time. Teams sign their 2nds to two ways and give them cheap deals with their restricted rights. When I say bully I mean how we used restricted rights to sign JMAC and V8 cheap. As for good/bad looks, the fact that Mike took a haircut to stay, Naz took a haircut to stay, and everyone is excited to be here, that says more about us.

3. You want to throw a #22 draft pick into the rotation when we are trying to contend? I am honestly asking. People say Miller is a steal and should have been a lottery pick and he cannot sniff the rotation . Minott is playing well in the G and he cannot sniff the rotation. I promise you Finch is not eager to give opportunities to rookies right now. Meanwhile the salary is on the books, the clock is running on their rookie deal, and they take up a valuable roster spot.

Finding quality makes sense, but win now is the only mode we are in. It is the only way we sustain this core. GSW drafted late and they didn’t rush to develop their picks. End of the day we need to change the way we think to change the way we win.

[BlacJacMac]

2. I literally have no idea what you’re talking about. It is done all the time. Teams sign their 2nds to two ways and give them cheap deals with their restricted rights. When I say bully I mean how we used restricted rights to sign JMAC and V8 cheap. As for good/bad looks, the fact that Mike took a haircut to stay, Naz took a haircut to stay, and everyone is excited to be here, that says more about us.

Its a lot easier to get guys to agree to 2-way deals when there is a direct path to playing time - ie: for a bad team. We no longer have that "luxury". Draft a 1st round pick and you have 4 years to bring him along slowly. Draft a 2nd and he might decide to play elsewhere.

3. You want to throw a #22 draft pick into the rotation when we are trying to contend? I am honestly asking. People say Miller is a steal and should have been a lottery pick and he cannot sniff the rotation . Minott is playing well in the G and he cannot sniff the rotation. I promise you Finch is not eager to give opportunities to rookies right now. Meanwhile the salary is on the books, the clock is running on their rookie deal, and they take up a valuable roster spot.

Finding quality makes sense, but win now is the only mode we are in. It is the only way we sustain this core. GSW drafted late and they didn’t rush to develop their picks. End of the day we need to change the way we think to change the way we win.

These concepts are not mutually exclusive. Take the more talented guy. If he forces his way into the rotation (like a Jamie Jacquez), great! If you have to bring him along slower, you can because he's under team control for 4 years.

Golden State's young talent was not drafted late. Kuminga (7), Moody (14), Podziemski (19).

[KGdaBom]

Apologies to KGdaBom, but I'm going to talk about trading draft picks again...

I did some early calculations, and if we combined our #28 pick and he #37 (MEM), the standard value we could get back is #22.

I was actually thinking TC should trade back on the high pick and then trade back at least one more time from there. We have 3 available 2nds to trade and no firsts going forward. Getting 3 more seconds would be huge and we aren’t exactly in the market for players who take 2-3 years to develop. We will have Minott, Miller, Clarke, and the late 20s or even #30 pick to develop. That is not even mentioning Moore who is currently occupying a roster spot. I think we are fine adding assets instead of bodies.

I initially was leaning towards winforlose here, thinking more about the primary objective of a trade being cap/tax management. However, with the second apron likely inevitable, I wonder if I'm leaning back towards shrink's perspective.

First of all, with resources and avenues of adding talent being eliminated, I think getting up to get a better player is more beneficial than multiple stabs at lesser talents. Additionally, with the apron penalties, I'm thinking about the inability to take in more contracts than we send out. With the later first and a second, there's not much room to take back less money in a swap. Trading up doesn't create a lot extra room, but it is room nonetheless.

You could have talked about this in the draft thread. I still think it's more appropriate there. It is a trade so talk about it here if you must.

[winforlose]

2. I literally have no idea what you’re talking about. It is done all the time. Teams sign their 2nds to two ways and give them cheap deals with their restricted rights. When I say bully I mean how we used restricted rights to sign JMAC and V8 cheap. As for good/bad looks, the fact that Mike took a haircut to stay, Naz took a haircut to stay, and everyone is excited to be here, that says more about us.

Its a lot easier to get guys to agree to 2-way deals when there is a direct path to playing time - ie: for a bad team. We no longer have that "luxury". Draft a 1st round pick and you have 4 years to bring him along slowly. Draft a 2nd and he might decide to play elsewhere.

3. You want to throw a #22 draft pick into the rotation when we are trying to contend? I am honestly asking. People say Miller is a steal and should have been a lottery pick and he cannot sniff the rotation . Minott is playing well in the G and he cannot sniff the rotation. I promise you Finch is not eager to give opportunities to rookies right now. Meanwhile the salary is on the books, the clock is running on their rookie deal, and they take up a valuable roster spot.

Finding quality makes sense, but win now is the only mode we are in. It is the only way we sustain this core. GSW drafted late and they didn’t rush to develop their picks. End of the day we need to change the way we think to change the way we win.

These concepts are not mutually exclusive. Take the more talented guy. If he forces his way into the rotation (like a Jamie Jacquez), great! If you have to bring him along slower, you can because he's under team control for 4 years.

Golden State's young talent was not drafted late. Kuminga (7), Moody (14), Podziemski (19).

1. Second round picks don’t often refuse to sign two ways and agree to sit out a year and be redrafted. Once he is a on a two way he doesn’t count against the cap, can be active for 50 games, makes a decent living, and has a better chance of getting a path to playing time because we are cap strapped and pick strapped.

2. Jaden was 28 and Desmond Bane 30. Leandro Ballmaro was 23. Once you get post lottery everything is a gamble. There are examples going both ways, but the difference is one takes up a roster spot, the other doesn’t. Imagine if next year Jaden and Kyle both go down. Do you want to be forced to use Miller, or would you rather have an experienced vet as a 3rd string who gives you a choice?

3. The odds of finding a NBA ready player in the 20s are not high. Even if you do, GSW is a play in team and we are a contender. The bar is set higher for our young guys.

[BlacJacMac]

1. I don't believe you can make a "Sign a 2-way or you sit out a year" offer.

2. Imagine you don't draft Jamie Jacquez because you're scared of late 1st round money.

3. That's what separates the Top GMs from the average or bad. If TC loves a guy at 21, he absolutely should try to get him - instead of taking 2 guys in the 30s that he kind of likes (or punting on the draft completely because maybe he'll like someone next year, or in 3 years).

2 of those 3 GS players were on an NBA Championship team 2 years ago. I'm not sure how much higher of a bar playing for us is than that.

[winforlose]

1. I don't believe you can make a "Sign a 2-way or you sit out a year" offer.

2. Imagine you don't draft Jamie Jacquez because you're scared of late 1st round money.

3. That's what separates the Top GMs from the average or bad. If TC loves a guy at 21, he absolutely should try to get him - instead of taking 2 guys in the 30s that he kind of likes (or punting on the draft completely because maybe he'll like someone next year, or in 3 years).

2 of those 3 GS players were on an NBA Championship team 2 years ago. I'm not sure how much higher of a bar playing for us is than that.

1. The Heat and Wolves were in a different position. The Wolves have a full 9 man rotation. The Heat were an 8 seed that over performed. We are one seed that dominates most games. More than half our losses are following late game collapses entirely of our own making. BTW, Jaime was the 18 pick. Dariq Whitehead went 22. There is a difference between late teens and early 20s.

2. TC has 3 2nds and a first every other year until 20230. Sometimes stock piling assets is the right move. Especially when you can only really improve your roster through minimums, drafting, and trading.

3. Kuminga and Moody were lottery picks and they played 11 and 16 minutes respectively. How important were Spellman and Evans to the Warriors during the peak?

[BlacJacMac]

I give up. I can't even see your goalposts any longer…

I concede that it’s impossible for a 1st round pick to crack our rotation at any point during their rookie contract.

[winforlose]

I give up. I can't even see your goalposts any longer…

I concede that it’s impossible for a 1st round pick to crack our rotation at any point during their rookie contract.

I don’t get what you’re confused about. The first issue is whether getting a player at 22 is significantly more likely to be a quality rotation player than at 28. This is Shrink’s plan.

My plan is to move the 28 on draft night to a team like Detroit for their second plus more seconds. Draft two high second round players and sign them both to two ways for a year or two before signing them cheap to our roster using restricted free agent control to leverage a favorable deal.

Your point is that players in the lottery or late teens have been useful. That they can be in a rotation for a peak team. What I am trying to point out is that GSW when it was drafting end of the first didn’t develop their players. When they drafted in the lottery they did. My question is whether a pick 22 is gonna jump over a Minott or Miller to get into our 9 ninth spot. Because we have all 5 starters, we have NAW and Naz, and I will bet you we bring back Morris and Kyle. So is an early 20s pick gonna get a rotation spot with Chris Finch as his coach? The same Chris Finch who doesn’t play his end of bench until sometime between 9 and 5 minutes left in a blowout? At least with a vet minimum player (or ring chaser,) in that roster spot they could get some productive playing time in case of an injury.