Trade Thread

[coolness]

Maybe I missed the thread. I have 3 trades + 1 signing on that ass.
Plus, maybe we can talk about who these 2022 picks would be.
Plus, I have an idea with some merit about mixing in vets who "don't match our timeline."


1. OKC
J.Grant + C.Joseph (much better if CJ declines his option. He can do that any time he wants, right?) + 46 + our only two future 2nd's.
for
#12 + our future protected 1st back.
whyDet? picks and cap space.
whyOKC? supposedly J.Grant has value. And, they can be accused of liking 2nd's.

2. NY
K.Hayes + H.Diallo + I.Stewart
for
A.Burks + #11
whyDet? contract situation, A.Burks is versatile and stretches the floor
whyNY? Hayes showed up okay in the 2nd half of the season after having injuries in each of his two years, right?
Diallo could be compared to Burks in the value sense. Diallo is signif younger and then signif cheaper for at least next year.
Stewart is solid and cheap for two more years like Hayes. I stG that I saw him being elite in some advanced d stat recently. (maybe a hallucination or false memory or whatevs)

3. CHA
C.Edwards + S.Lee + I.Livers
for
G.Hayward + 13th or 15th pick (I think they would pick for us and the trade would happen on the first day of free agency.)
why Det? rookie contract + versatile, floor-stretching vet.
why CHA? save tons of money. Wasn't Lee good in the G League? Some of you guys think Livers is good, so ______.

4. Sign I.Hartenstein with the money we saved on Grant. Hayward takes up our Brunson/Simons/Ayton money though.

5. Sign small one-year contracts to round out the roster. Youth and Vets.

6. Keeping Olynyk is part of the madness here. Let me explain.

7. Keep F.Jackson? One cheap year left on the deal. 24 year old pg. Not an outside shooter, but will probably improve some. Big advantage for bench point guards staying with the team they already know.

My unusual idea is that Burks/Hayward/Olynyk would be part of the core at 30 or 31 years old.
All three are versatile, stretch the floor, and aren't using much athleticism in their games afaik.
Each of those three expire after two more seasons. Together they would be re-signed for signif less overall when Bey gets paid.
We could become a good or great team and those 3 could be in the rotation into their mid-30s. Maybe late 30s.
It's good to have vets in a certain way. They will still be good outside shooters as they age.
Floor stretching is a huge deal. We would go from being bad at it to good at it right away.

The Elephunk in the room is that if I value those 3 extra 1st's this year and the future returned 1st from OKC, then maybe the other teams would value them highly too and refuse. Still fairly equal trades imo.

Then we have Jackson?, Cade, Burks, Hayward, Bey, Olynyk, Hartenstein +#5 + #11 + #12 + #13 or #15

I have my ideas for drafting 4 1st's in the top 15 and you have yours. A lot would depend on the teams drafting ahead of us.
I would go for 'high-floor' guys in two picks and 'high-ish ceiling' for the other two.
Some guys will definitely fall out of the top-10. Eason? Dyson? Griffin? Duren? Agbaji? TyTY? Maybe more.

EDIT: just forgot Hartenstein at first in my projected roster.

[Pharaoh]

Think this is part of the "shiny new toy is better than the less shiny somewhat older toy" syndrome we see on here a fair bit.

Giving up Hayes, Stewart, Livers, Diallo + for unknown players/picks is kinda funny

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

[coolness]

Think this is part of the "shiny new toy is better than the less shiny somewhat older toy" syndrome we see on here a fair bit.

Giving up Hayes, Stewart, Livers, Diallo + for unknown players/picks is kinda funny

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

The non-pick players are known and solid. 4 extra 1st's sounds great to me.

Hayes, Stewart, Livers, and Diallo are each a little unknown. Especially Livers. Stewart is the most known and he will need money in 2 years along with Bey. It could be decent money like $15m + Bey will get paid well if he is a 20ppg guy. He might get overpaid too. A decision would be made on Hayes in two years too.
Diallo is okay, but I would rather his minutes went to shooters.

[zeebneeb]

The only trades I'm interested in are ones that involve Grant, Olynyk, Joseph, Lee, McGruder, and Garza.

I await draft night, when Grant is moved for a high draft pick, along with Olynyk, and others.

[coolness]

The only trades I'm interested in are ones that involve Grant, Olynyk, Joseph, Lee, McGruder, and Garza.

I await draft night, when Grant is moved for a high draft pick, along with Olynyk, and others.

I def see the logic. I forgot McGruder too who I wouldn't miss. And Garza has a team option, right?

[chrbal]

I think Grant and Olynyk need to get traded. It’s time to let McGruder free, Garza should have a difficult time making the team. He’s a nice story, but let him get more of a run at the g league level.

Maybe I missed the thread. I have 3 trades + 1 signing on that ass.
Plus, maybe we can talk about who these 2022 picks would be.
Plus, I have an idea with some merit about mixing in vets who "don't match our timeline."

3. CHA
C.Edwards + S.Lee + I.Livers
for
G.Hayward + 13th or 15th pick (I think they would pick for us and the trade would happen on the first day of free agency.)
why Det? rookie contract + versatile, floor-stretching vet.
why CHA? save tons of money. Wasn't Lee good in the G League? Some of you guys think Livers is good, so ______.

I only really skimmed everything else but this…why? What’s the benefit? Are you really a hornets fan? I’m pretty sure Griffin’s money finally comes off the books and you decide we need a new one.

Hayward is good for like 55-60 games a season at like $30 million per. Also you know of all those injury prone guys who suddenly got healthy and improved their game in their early to mid 30s…yeah I have no idea of one either.

Not to mention I have to think Charlotte would at least want one already proven player. You give them nothing.

[MotownMadness]

Yeah IDK why a mod won't ever just sticky a trades and transaction thread here

[coolness]

I think Grant and Olynyk need to get traded. It’s time to let McGruder free, Garza should have a difficult time making the team. He’s a nice story, but let him get more of a run at the g league level.

Maybe I missed the thread. I have 3 trades + 1 signing on that ass.
Plus, maybe we can talk about who these 2022 picks would be.
Plus, I have an idea with some merit about mixing in vets who "don't match our timeline."

3. CHA
C.Edwards + S.Lee + I.Livers
for
G.Hayward + 13th or 15th pick (I think they would pick for us and the trade would happen on the first day of free agency.)
why Det? rookie contract + versatile, floor-stretching vet.
why CHA? save tons of money. Wasn't Lee good in the G League? Some of you guys think Livers is good, so ______.

I only really skimmed everything else but this…why? What’s the benefit? Are you really a hornets fan? I’m pretty sure Griffin’s money finally comes off the books and you decide we need a new one.

Hayward is good for like 55-60 games a season at like $30 million per. Also you know of all those injury prone guys who suddenly got healthy and improved their game in their early to mid 30s…yeah I have no idea of one either.

Not to mention I have to think Charlotte would at least want one already proven player. You give them nothing.

As long as Hayward gets minutes in the playoffs, there is a benefit. He isn't necessarily getting 30 mpg.

Funny you asked if I'm a Hornets fan. Maybe a little bit. Def not in my top-5 teams. But you say Charlotte would want at least one already proven player in the same critique. Det and Cha would both be risking something for sure.

[coolness]

I think Grant and Olynyk need to get traded. It’s time to let McGruder free, Garza should have a difficult time making the team. He’s a nice story, but let him get more of a run at the g league level.

Grant + Olynyk was my first idea. I thought OKC could just barely fit them in under the cap. When I looked again, they could just barely NOT fit them in, so they would have to give up M.Muscala or D.Favors, who at least expire unlike Olynyk. But, the idea of just making Olynyk useful intrigued me. I like the idea of keeping guys together. Players knowing each other has an advantage just like good coaching, good contracts, or even good upside.

[chrbal]

I think Grant and Olynyk need to get traded. It’s time to let McGruder free, Garza should have a difficult time making the team. He’s a nice story, but let him get more of a run at the g league level.

Maybe I missed the thread. I have 3 trades + 1 signing on that ass.
Plus, maybe we can talk about who these 2022 picks would be.
Plus, I have an idea with some merit about mixing in vets who "don't match our timeline."

3. CHA
C.Edwards + S.Lee + I.Livers
for
G.Hayward + 13th or 15th pick (I think they would pick for us and the trade would happen on the first day of free agency.)
why Det? rookie contract + versatile, floor-stretching vet.
why CHA? save tons of money. Wasn't Lee good in the G League? Some of you guys think Livers is good, so ______.

I only really skimmed everything else but this…why? What’s the benefit? Are you really a hornets fan? I’m pretty sure Griffin’s money finally comes off the books and you decide we need a new one.

Hayward is good for like 55-60 games a season at like $30 million per. Also you know of all those injury prone guys who suddenly got healthy and improved their game in their early to mid 30s…yeah I have no idea of one either.

Not to mention I have to think Charlotte would at least want one already proven player. You give them nothing.

As long as Hayward gets minutes in the playoffs, there is a benefit. He isn't necessarily getting 30 mpg.

Funny you asked if I'm a Hornets fan. Maybe a little bit. Def not in my top-5 teams. But you say Charlotte would want at least one already proven player in the same critique. Det and Cha would both be risking something for sure.

Charlotte in your move is outright dumping Hayward, giving a pick to do so, and taking back Livers (a project) and some camp bodies. So I guess the cap space is the benefit, I just feel like they’d realistically want at least one ready to go player. That’s just my focus on relatively realistic trades.

Im not a fan of Grant, Edwards, Garza to Portland for Simons, 7, and a future first.

[coolness]

I think Grant and Olynyk need to get traded. It’s time to let McGruder free, Garza should have a difficult time making the team. He’s a nice story, but let him get more of a run at the g league level.



I only really skimmed everything else but this…why? What’s the benefit? Are you really a hornets fan? I’m pretty sure Griffin’s money finally comes off the books and you decide we need a new one.

Hayward is good for like 55-60 games a season at like $30 million per. Also you know of all those injury prone guys who suddenly got healthy and improved their game in their early to mid 30s…yeah I have no idea of one either.

Not to mention I have to think Charlotte would at least want one already proven player. You give them nothing.

As long as Hayward gets minutes in the playoffs, there is a benefit. He isn't necessarily getting 30 mpg.

Funny you asked if I'm a Hornets fan. Maybe a little bit. Def not in my top-5 teams. But you say Charlotte would want at least one already proven player in the same critique. Det and Cha would both be risking something for sure.

Charlotte in your move is outright dumping Hayward, giving a pick to do so, and taking back Livers (a project) and some camp bodies. So I guess the cap space is the benefit, I just feel like they’d realistically want at least one ready to go player. That’s just my focus on relatively realistic trades.

Im not a fan of Grant, Edwards, Garza to Portland for Simons, 7, and a future first.

1. Your idea on Charlotte makes sense to me easily.

2. How could you not be a fan of Simons, 7, and a future 1st for crap?

[chrbal]

As long as Hayward gets minutes in the playoffs, there is a benefit. He isn't necessarily getting 30 mpg.

Funny you asked if I'm a Hornets fan. Maybe a little bit. Def not in my top-5 teams. But you say Charlotte would want at least one already proven player in the same critique. Det and Cha would both be risking something for sure.

Charlotte in your move is outright dumping Hayward, giving a pick to do so, and taking back Livers (a project) and some camp bodies. So I guess the cap space is the benefit, I just feel like they’d realistically want at least one ready to go player. That’s just my focus on relatively realistic trades.

Im not a fan of Grant, Edwards, Garza to Portland for Simons, 7, and a future first.

1. Your idea on Charlotte makes sense to me easily.

2. How could you not be a fan of Simons, 7, and a future 1st for crap?

That trade being offered in reality, sure. It’d be nice to see isiah thomas running a team again.

But when people propose that trade and think it’s realistic, it honestly kind of annoys me

[edmunder_prc]

Is there a potential that Charlotte wants to go all in on vets? And get rid of Hayward for better players?

CHA: trade away Hayward + 13 AND 15.

DET: trade them Grant, Diallo, Livers, KO.

CHA gets a lot better, somewhere on the Bulls level. Is that enough to? Getting out of Hayward to give Grant a contract? Who knows. Diallo, Livers, KO are better than Kelly Oubre, Plumlee, who were starters.

We are using the cap space to punt next year, just get younger.

But CHA probably wants to draft two guys, hope Boughknight figures it out and make the playoffs with young guys.

Not likely but having fun thinking.

[coolness]

Is there a potential that Charlotte wants to go all in on vets? And get rid of Hayward for better players?

CHA: trade away Hayward + 13 AND 15.

DET: trade them Grant, Diallo, Livers, KO.

CHA gets a lot better, somewhere on the Bulls level. Is that enough to? Getting out of Hayward to give Grant a contract? Who knows. Diallo, Livers, KO are better than Kelly Oubre, Plumlee, who were starters.

We are using the cap space to punt next year, just get younger.

But CHA probably wants to draft two guys, hope Boughknight figures it out and make the playoffs with young guys.

Not likely but having fun thinking.

Hex! Yes! Does Grant have the value of Hayward if it were straight up? Diallo is maybe worth #15, but I doubt it. Livers and Olynyk are good to have in a certain way, but I doubt they have trade value. Olynyk isn't necessary for matching salaries unless maybe if the picks count as salary. That's a rule I can't remember if I ever did know.

#13 and #15 would be big wins if they make the rotation.

[coolness]

New and Similar

Cha/Det/OKC

We give #5

We get #12 + #13 + #15 + Future 1st Returned from OKC
+ Maybe more future 1st's from OKC such as Denver and Utah 1st's which at least won't turn into 2nd's

EDIT: getting those other future 1st's than our own is pretty much too much for us. BUT they could go to Charlotte. Also, wondering if Charlotte considers Hayward negative value in a vacuum. I would rather have him for the Pistons than Grant + our smallest deals. At least there is a chance that Hayward would help us long-term and not want a long-term big raise contract like Grant does while thinking he is much better and should have a much bigger role than he should like Grant does.
ELEPHUNK IN ROOM: if I'm right about Grant, then why should anyone want him?

Possibly give to OKC or Cha: J.Grant, I.Livers, S.Lee, C.Edwards, L.Garza, #46, future 2nd's
Possibly get: another future 1st or two from OKC (maybe just the Den and Utah picks. There are more though.)
*OKC could absorb Grant. Cha could send out Hayward for Grant + small deals.



Det/NYK
Still want: A.Burks + #11
Would give: K.Hayes + H.Diallo + I.Stewart + maybe #46 + maybe future 2nd's + maybe Livers, Lee, Edwards


Deep Thought by Jack Handy: keeping F.Jackson and C.Joseph as expirings ain't bad. Maybe one or both will fit long-term. I've never understood teams changing their bench point guards every year when they could probably be better with the same teammates long-term.

[tmorgan]

There’s a deal on the trade board with OKC and POR that I like and think is realistic.

POR
Out: TPE, 7
In: Grant, 12

OKC
Out: 12, DET#1(23, top 18 prot), DEN#1(23, top 14 prot)
In: 7

DET
Out: Grant
In: DET#1(23), DEN#1(23, top 14 prot)

I realize many of you think we can get more for an expiring Grant. If you want to retain and re-sign him, we have a philosophical difference, but i won’t argue with you about it. If you want the cap space and to get something for him before he walks, this is a solid deal. Getting our own heavily protected over multiple years pick back has added value from flexibility, and i imagine the Denver pick will convey next year at around spot 20-24.

If we do this, getting just future picks, the idea is to make offers to some FA right now, open up a starting spot if our preferred pick is a wing, and get something rather than nothing for Grant. I’m sure most of you won’t love it, but if we do decide to trade Grant and do better than this, I’ll be surprised (and happy about it).

[chrbal]

The pick coming back is the sliding protection pick we swapped out for Stewart? If so I kind of like it, but I’m mainly doing it if I have a major “totally not illegal” commitment from Lavine or someone on that level. I really don’t want to clear pace to outbid everyone on Brunson, sign Bamba, and keep Bagley.

Honestly I might just do it anyway. But I actually think the sliding protection works with our timeline.

[edmunder_prc]

All depends on what Weaver's 3 year plan is:

Keeping Grant and giving him a long term deal locks the team in. Moving Grant opens up all kinds of possibilities.

Trade Grant for picks - Take someone like Ivey who has a very high upside but may need a year, and remain a bottom 10 team with a chance for a high pick again.

Then use all that cap space to take on a bad contract, maybe, if a high enough pick comes along with it.

All in on player development and upside of Cade, Ivey, Diallo, Livers, Bey, Stewart, Hayes and guys like Key, Pickett. Plus potentially 3-4 picks in 2023.

That is a slow burn, long term strategy for getting better. Keep taking swings and let Cade develop into a stud in 2-3 years with A LOT of young talent around him - hopefully that can shoot and defend.

[coolness]

This is what I did on the T&inT Board. Maybe take out G.Hayward for K.Oubre, who is younger and cheaper.
Just saying, because a Charlotte fan hated this trade, but also made a thread about using a 2nd to dump Oubre outright.

Cha out: #13 + #15 + G.Hayward
Cha in: S.Lee + C.Edwards + I.Livers + #34 + #46 + Den future 1st + Wash future 1st + Utah future 1st

Why? Big immediate savings, fliers, picks. Pushes out the future rookie contracts to when their young core is getting paid.

Det out: #5 + J.Grant + S.Lee + C.Edwards + I.Livers + #46
Det in: #12 + #13 +#15 + future protected 1st back from OKC + G.Hayward

Why? I want Hayward over Grant on my fave team. Pretty soon Hayward makes less. #5 has its risk. Extra 1st round deals.

OKC out: #12 + #30 + #34 + Det future protec 1st + Den future 1st + Wash future 1st + Utah futur 1st + Hou future 1st + a few future 2nd's
OKC in: #5 + #7 + E.Bledsoe

Why? Consolidate for higher talent in the draft. Maintain another year of expirings and very likely lotto pick.

Por out: E.Bledsoe + #7
Por in: J.Grant + #30 + Hou future 1st + a few future 2nd's from OKC

Why? Grant could help. Supposedly there is a Grant/Portland connection or Grant/Dame connection. #30 ain't bad. Future picks.

[DBC10]

There’s a deal on the trade board with OKC and POR that I like and think is realistic.

POR
Out: TPE, 7
In: Grant, 12

OKC
Out: 12, DET#1(23, top 18 prot), DEN#1(23, top 14 prot)
In: 7

DET
Out: Grant
In: DET#1(23), DEN#1(23, top 14 prot)

I realize many of you think we can get more for an expiring Grant. If you want to retain and re-sign him, we have a philosophical difference, but i won’t argue with you about it. If you want the cap space and to get something for him before he walks, this is a solid deal. Getting our own heavily protected over multiple years pick back has added value from flexibility, and i imagine the Denver pick will convey next year at around spot 20-24.

If we do this, getting just future picks, the idea is to make offers to some FA right now, open up a starting spot if our preferred pick is a wing, and get something rather than nothing for Grant. I’m sure most of you won’t love it, but if we do decide to trade Grant and do better than this, I’ll be surprised (and happy about it).

I like it just because it's intricate enough that it's within the realm of possibility. Reality is, we're more than likely not to get a straight swap of Grant for #7, no matter how desperate Portland is to retool around Dame. Because surprise, they can actually trade Dame and blow it all up if they want to instead of dragging the actual rebuild process. So I don't consider their desperation to be all that...desperate

And this keeps the steady pace of development with the growth plus the new #5 with future options in tow