RealGM

This was brought up today as a question to Edwards in the mailbag. I thought it would be interesting conversation as there is always the debate between draft picks and proven players between diff sides.

Here were actually talking about high end talent and honestly it might not be crazy to see one of these guys traded. I will post the question and reply I wont post my thoughts on it just yet.

If a star is available, someone like SGA or Mitchell, do you see the Pistons entertaining trading our pick? — @REWmusic

Before the regular season concluded, general manager Troy Weaver said that the Pistons were in “talent acquisition” mode. That isn’t just through the draft, but any way possible that makes sense for the organization going forward.

So, yeah, I believe Detroit would entertain trading its pick for Shai Gilgeous-Alexander or Donovan Mitchell, two of the best young guards in the NBA. I do believe that if the Pistons have a chance to land Chet Holmgren or Jabari Smith, they’ll keep the pick. If Detroit is picking third or later and those two are off the board, my gut tells me that the pick would most definitely be discussed as a trade chip if a deal presents itself that brings the Pistons back a young star.

Part of the intrigue in having a top draft pick is not just the potential of the player but the rookie-scale contract, as well. That’s an asset in itself as teams build from the ground up. If you can get a really good player that you won’t have to pay for four years, you take that all day and night. On the other hand, if Detroit doesn’t love anyone after its top two or three choices are off the board, it might be in the organization’s best interest to get a proven young player next to Cunningham in order to capitalize on him being on a rookie-scale deal for the next few years.

There are different ways to view it, but all are dependent upon where the Pistons pick and how they feel about the potential star power of this particular draft class.

That's tough. First and foremost, you'd have to be VERY confident that SGA's medicals are good. I haven't tracked the reasons for him being out, but if heavily "tanking and therefore we'll sit you," and nothing actually concerning, then I would heavily consider it.

I know you're passing up 4 years of cheap rookie contracts, but automatically having a top 3 backcourt in the NBA (assuming Cade hits) is too valuable to pass up. Now if you pass up Paolo/Ivey and they are also awesome, then it was a bad trade. But the draft is a crapshoot, and SGA is the goods if healthy.

I'm a little out on Mitchell. And maybe that isn't fair. But I'm much more into SGA as a partner next to Cade than Mitchell.

Tempting, for SGA at least. Don’t love Mitchell as much with his defensive issues. Yeah, I know Shai has some as well, but I’ll excuse him a bit on context. Mitchell has Gobert and still can’t even funnel correctly.

If it’s the 3rd or 4th pick and Chet and Jabari are gone… do I want cheaper Paolo or Sharpe or one of those guys? That’s a tough call. How do we make salary work? Are we also unloading contracts i don’t want (Olynyk, CoJo), or am I including players i don’t want to give up for free (Grant, Hayes, Stewart)? That matters.

I just might, Cade is so advanced it might be worth it to pair him with a young star and skip the whole years of development with another rookie.

tmorgan wrote:Tempting, for SGA at least. Don’t love Mitchell as much with his defensive issues. Yeah, I know Shai has some as well, but I’ll excuse him a bit on context. Mitchell has Gobert and still can’t even funnel correctly.

If it’s the 3rd or 4th pick and Chet and Jabari are gone… do I want cheaper Paolo or Sharpe or one of those guys? That’s a tough call. How do we make salary work? Are we also unloading contracts i don’t want (Olynyk, CoJo), or am I including players i don’t want to give up for free (Grant, Hayes, Stewart)? That matters.

We have alot of cap space going into next season. Fig we would be using the space that would of went to Ayton/Brunson it seems like it should be pretty doable for us. Lets assume its a close enough that if you want to get it done you can maybe we have to make 2 deals or something but lets not go to far down the rabbit hole on that. If you and Weaver want one of these guys you're getting them =).

I think this draft is a clear top three, then a bit of a fall. I'd consider trading a #4 pick for SGA if his health seemed good. I wouldn't trade a first rounder for Mitchell at this point and don't really want him on the roster. I don't think you can win in the playoffs with him as a major piece/part of the salary cap. If we have a top 3 pick, though, I'd rather have the front court player on a rookie contract with star upside.

It's an interesting question.

SGA I'd consider because I like his two way potential better and he seems like the type of personality that would take well to Detroit. As much as I'd like an uber athletic guard next to Cade, I don't think Mitchell's one way game, inconsistent shooting, tunnel vision at times and personality really fit. It's why I'm not a big fan of Ivey's fit either. Both SGA and Mitchell are a bit injury prone too and I worry about Mitchell especially holding up in the long run due to his style of play so that's a potential red flag.

The other debate is paying max salary now to a proven star and hurting cap flexibility going forward as opposed to getting the 4 year rookie contract for a player who can potentially be a star in their cheap years. I don't know, I'm kind of back and forth on this. SGA maybe, Mitchell no.

No for me. I like building the core through the draft and finishing with a free agent signing, not the reverse.

I think we might keep Grant if we did this move. If we add a 25yo D.Mitch(seems like he should be older) or soon to be 24 SGA he would be closer on the timeline. We wouldnt want have to keep him of course.

Cade
SGA/D.Mitch
Bey
Grant
Stewart

One thing to say with this move is you dont run into the LBJ/Luka problem where you cant land that 2nd all star to go with them early on. Ceiling is higher with SGA but floor is also lower because injuries.

For me I dont think I would give the top 3 and I'd have to judge Sharpes workouts for 4. I feel like our teams overall ceiling is higher by hitting on this pick and trying to potentially land a better player then SGA/D.Mitch and having that extra cap space. Another bonus to sitting back is we get one more likely mid to late lotto pick. Esp if we can wait till next year to hit free agency we really could be in a good spot.

Pick 5 for me is likely where i would do it though. D.Mitch stock is down but hes still a big time talent. Hes actually younger then Billups was when we traded for him. Its not my dream player but I'm content rolling with D.Mitch or SGA over the cap space and Ivey or Murray.

Edit-I dont know thinking of it more for me the spot for this trade might even be 6. Like maybe SGA 5 and D.Mitch 6 or something. I think we would be better off rolling the dice on Ivey becoming a D.Mitch then dropping the money.

Manocad wrote:No for me. I like building the core through the draft and finishing with a free agent signing, not the reverse.

I agree with you, but with an important caveat. And that's that it depends on Weavers big board. He might have the top 3 guys in one tier that he really, really likes, and then a huge drop off to #4. And if that's the case, then trading #4 for SGA would be a no brainer. Depending on what else it takes to get him, because it would certainly be more than the #4 pick.

There's also this crazy thing that it seems so unrealistic, unless OKC thinks they are 3+ years away from contending for the playoffs. And even then I don't know why you move off of SGA.

I would 1000% trade a top 3 pick in this draft for SGA, no questions asked, #1 pick included.

This draft is iffy. Chet is the only player I really like in it and he could pretty easily bust. The odds of getting a player who will become as good as SGA is now isn't all that great.

Why would the Thunder? They've got draft assets coming out of their ears and not a whole lot of bankable talent, and SGA is still pretty young.

Snakebites wrote:Why would the Thunder? They've got draft assets coming out of their ears and not a whole lot of bankable talent, and SGA is still pretty young.

Well last year their was rumors they offered 6 and SGA for Cade. Obv thats a rumor and that was Cade who was a better prospect but who knows maybe they fall in love with someone or think SGA is injury prone or just purely like Giddey and not the fit with SGA. Not likely hes moved but not impossible by any means.

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2021/07/27/rumor-thunder-offered-gilgeous-alexander-no-6-for-no-1-pick-pistons-shot-it-down/

Not a top 3, likely not #4 either given Sharpe is likely to be there but #5 or #6?

It would depend on what resources we had left available to surround Cade, Grant, Bey & SGA/Mitchell with.

Hayes, Diallo, FJ, Livers, Stewart, Bags, KO

What funds are left assuming we retained Bags?

Likely we're operating as a over the cap team so it's the full MLE right?

Could we land Jalen Smith with that?

What other deals could we swing to strengthen the bench?

Adding a proven stud isn't nessacarily a bad idea but it would require a few follow up moves to make us a real playoff threat

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

Snakebites wrote:Why would the Thunder? They've got draft assets coming out of their ears and not a whole lot of bankable talent, and SGA is still pretty young.

This might sound odd but SGA isn’t really on their timeline. At 23 years old this past season he was not only their oldest rotation player but one of the oldest players on the roster period. Besides Derrick Favors with a player option next season SGA is their only player not on a rookie contract in 2023.

That obviously means they can afford him, but they are going to be a very, very bad team for the length of his contract at the rate they’re going. None of their prospects seem to have that much potential as is and it’s likely they don’t view SGA as a true lead guy anyways.

I could definitely see them trying to re-load and try to find a true franchise piece. If the report last draft of them offering SGA and the 6th pick to us is true then that would reinforce that idea.

That said, I’m not sure if they view any of the top players to be potential franchise guys but who knows.

#3 In this draft? yes. Too many question marks at the top. You put cade and SGA in the backcourt and figure the rest out.

whitehops wrote:

Snakebites wrote:Why would the Thunder? They've got draft assets coming out of their ears and not a whole lot of bankable talent, and SGA is still pretty young.

This might sound odd but SGA isn’t really on their timeline. At 23 years old this past season he was not only their oldest rotation player but one of the oldest players on the roster period. Besides Derrick Favors with a player option next season SGA is their only player not on a rookie contract in 2023.

That obviously means they can afford him, but they are going to be a very, very bad team for the length of his contract at the rate they’re going. None of their prospects seem to have that much potential as is and it’s likely they don’t view SGA as a true lead guy anyways.

I could definitely see them trying to re-load and try to find a true franchise piece. If the report last draft of them offering SGA and the 6th pick to us is true then that would reinforce that idea.

That said, I’m not sure if they view any of the top players to be potential franchise guys but who knows.

You might be right, but I have to wonder if the Thunder share your dim outlook on their young pieces. And there’s a solid chance they already have a top pick in this draft, too.

Snakebites wrote:

whitehops wrote:

Snakebites wrote:Why would the Thunder? They've got draft assets coming out of their ears and not a whole lot of bankable talent, and SGA is still pretty young.

This might sound odd but SGA isn’t really on their timeline. At 23 years old this past season he was not only their oldest rotation player but one of the oldest players on the roster period. Besides Derrick Favors with a player option next season SGA is their only player not on a rookie contract in 2023.

That obviously means they can afford him, but they are going to be a very, very bad team for the length of his contract at the rate they’re going. None of their prospects seem to have that much potential as is and it’s likely they don’t view SGA as a true lead guy anyways.

I could definitely see them trying to re-load and try to find a true franchise piece. If the report last draft of them offering SGA and the 6th pick to us is true then that would reinforce that idea.

That said, I’m not sure if they view any of the top players to be potential franchise guys but who knows.

You might be right, but I have to wonder if the Thunder share your dim outlook on their young pieces. And there’s a solid chance they already have a top pick in this draft, too.

I agree that if I'm OKC, I don't view a 24 year old as "too old for their timeline." If he were 27, maybe? But 24 is just so young that they could suck for 3 more years and he's still only 27 years old.

And as you say, if they end up with a top 3 pick, there would seemingly be no reason to reset their timeline since you'd have a 20 year Josh Giddey and then a top young PF? They'd be a couple of years away form the playoffs IMO.

No no no

As soon as we pick up a huge contract, our rebuild slows down, cap space is tight, and we sort of just blew our wad.

We are a play-in team at best. The smart move is to collect young assets on rookie scale contracts for another year.

No reason to change course when we already have the thing we wanted. Just keep the thing. The thing is good.