Warriors reported to be looking to trade this year's first round pick...

[Badly Browned]

Wood must really be a cancer to only get filler + the 26th pick in a weak draft.

[jaymo123]

Wood must really be a cancer to only get filler + the 26th pick in a weak draft.

He has to be because Detroit didn't even match Houston's offer. A 3 year, 41mill contract is cheap by NBA standards.

[Crazy-Canuck]

If houston drafts pablo or chet, u can probably trade the pick for garuba.

[Onus]

If houston drafts pablo or chet, u can probably trade the pick for garuba.

That would be great

[azwfan]

Looks like the Dallas portion of that rumor was correct.

Ill take a heavily protected first for our pick as long as theres reasonable assurance it will convey at some point.

What im thinking is more likely is several 2nds and that just doesnt quite get the juices flowing.

[whatisacenter]

Looks like the Dallas portion of that rumor was correct.

Ill take a heavily protected first for our pick as long as theres reasonable assurance it will convey at some point.

What im thinking is more likely is several 2nds and that just doesnt quite get the juices flowing.

To me, they have to get a vet back or a future first or it's a waste of an asset. I think they should keep the pick and take a swing at a player that slips(Kendall Brown, Dalen Terry, Jovic, EJ Liddell and LaRavia) I think one of those guys will be there. Also curious to see where Diabate ends up going and if he moves up the mocks in the next week.

[Crazy-Canuck]

Wood must really be a cancer to only get filler + the 26th pick in a weak draft.

A combination of a questionable attitude and Cs who cant defend not being so valuable.

These playoffs are showing that defense is king.

[DAWill1128]

I forgot we have two 2nd rounders this year along with the 1st. Something is going to happen.

I am more in the camp of take three swings at the plate since you have the G-League. I mean look at GP2, Struss, and Vincent who were all undrafted. Value exists if you can find it, might take three shots at it but I think it's worth it.

I do kinda like both guys they've brought in, Bouyea the point guard from San Francisco and Koloko the center from Arizona. Both bring some useful skills to our mix.

[FNQ]

Very strange that a contract that would cost less than 2m for several years would be the financial breaking point

I don’t buy it, but if it is true, that doesn’t bode well for keeping Wiggins, Poole, GP2, and Looney

[FNQ]

Wood must really be a cancer to only get filler + the 26th pick in a weak draft.

A combination of a questionable attitude and Cs who cant defend not being so valuable.

These playoffs are showing that defense is king.

Average rebounder too.. has all the peripherals of David Lee on the Knicks with a ton less impact

[Onus]

Wood must really be a cancer to only get filler + the 26th pick in a weak draft.

A combination of a questionable attitude and Cs who cant defend not being so valuable.

These playoffs are showing that defense is king.

If you can convince him he's the first big off the bench maybe 2nd you might get some impact from him. I do feel like in 2016 we missed Lee's scoring off the bench. But there's no way Wood can be a big minute player. Think of him as Enes Kanter, who has some value against some teams, but he's not someone you can rely on for minutes against every team.

[and1GS]

I'm OK with shipping out our first if it's for a rotation level player (like 9-10, basically a Lee upgrade), but I don't really get the point in kicking the can down the road for a future conditional first that will likely end up at the same pick.

I also don't think a rotation player deal exists? We can take back 125% in salary plus 100k in a trade, so a 2.48m deal if we trade Lee (as an example). That means the best we could do in a deal is Ben Mclemore, Elfrid Payton, Hassan Whiteside, Drummond, Neto or Monk (who I highly doubt will get as small a deal in FA). I'm not clear on how much time those guys have left on their deals, but that's the caliber of player we're looking at. I may be missing something, but I just am not seeing the point in dealing the pick for one of those guys let alone for a future pick?

Where it gets interesting is if we bundle in Wiseman. That could net us a Larry Nance, Nurkic, Graham, Mann or Crowder type guy - all would be incredibly helpful for us. It's a big gamble I'm not sure I'd be comfortable making though. And frankly I'd hope Wiseman's value would be higher than Crowder lol.

[azwfan]

Looks like the Dallas portion of that rumor was correct.

Ill take a heavily protected first for our pick as long as theres reasonable assurance it will convey at some point.

What im thinking is more likely is several 2nds and that just doesnt quite get the juices flowing.

To me, they have to get a vet back or a future first or it's a waste of an asset. I think they should keep the pick and take a swing at a player that slips(Kendall Brown, Dalen Terry, Jovic, EJ Liddell and LaRavia) I think one of those guys will be there. Also curious to see where Diabate ends up going and if he moves up the mocks in the next week.

Im conflicted on it.

In one hand: Seems better to get a cheap cost controlled asset for the end of the roster. (Draft pick)

On the other: this seems to be regarded as a not so great draft.

We already got 3 unproven guys at the end of the roster and Im unsure (but hopeful) they can be rotation players next season. So a vet min guy will probably be better for next years roster than a rookie.

Then again, being not so sure on the young guys (the future) seems to indicate its better to take another swing to give us a better chance of striking it big.

As far as “wasting an asset”. It really depends. If you think whoever we draft at 28 will be a better asset than a “protected 1st” then it makes sense to make the pick. But im not sure thats true. Draft picks seem to have much more value before they are used. And late oicks rately work out. For example this years trade deadline was probably the first time Poole was worth a 1st rd pick. Jacob Evans never was. Neither was Jones. Looney wasnt either (while on his rookie contract). Spellman wasnt.

It seems to me that punting on the pick from an asset management standpoint is the best thing to do if you arent in love with the players available. May even be best from a short term roster construction as I would guess that a vet min player would be better for winning next season then a typical late 1st rookie.

But on long term roster construction think drafting is the best use cause it gives you another chance to hit, and high end players are hard to find and therefor expensive to acquire.

As we straddle the tightrope of development and competing, i think given how late the pick is, it makes sense to lean short term with these lower end assets, even though drafting a young high upside player is more exciting for me.

[wco81]

What is higher, a minimum vet salary or the salary of the #28 pick?

[azwfan]

What is higher, a minimum vet salary or the salary of the #28 pick?

Think it depends on years of service, but pretty sure vet minimum is higher or if not, its going to be pretty darn close.

Tho vet minimum contracts are only 1-yr deals and rookie contracts are at least 2 years with options.

[azwfan]

Very strange that a contract that would cost less than 2m for several years would be the financial breaking point

I don’t buy it, but if it is true, that doesn’t bode well for keeping Wiggins, Poole, GP2, and Looney

Not really.

I dont skip buying coffee cause i need that money to pay my mortgage, i skip buying coffee cause its not worth it to me.

Punting the pick is basically saying this coffee sucks, ima wait till theres some good coffee to buy.

[wco81]

Only way a team would give up a potentially higher future FRP for a late FRP is if some player they really liked dropped way to the end of the first round.

Seems to be something that happens more in the NFL than the NBA because they draft so many more players and have more roster spots to fill.

I can't recall a case where an NBA team trades back into the end of the first round and gives up a future FRP which may potentially be much higher than #28 to do it. Seen it several times in the NFL though. In fact NFL doesn't even do things like top-5 protect FRPs when they make trades, do they?

[Old_Blue]

I dont skip buying coffee cause i need that money to pay my mortgage, i skip buying coffee cause its not worth it to me.

Everyone else pays $9 every single work day for a double cappuccino shot grande mocha latte (AKA a Diabetes Special). Who said you were exempted?

[azwfan]

Only way a team would give up a potentially higher future FRP for a late FRP is if some player they really liked dropped way to the end of the first round.

Seems to be something that happens more in the NFL than the NBA because they draft so many more players and have more roster spots to fill.

I can't recall a case where an NBA team trades back into the end of the first round and gives up a future FRP which may potentially be much higher than #28 to do it. Seen it several times in the NFL though. In fact NFL doesn't even do things like top-5 protect FRPs when they make trades, do they?

Denver just traded a future pick for #30 (and 2 2nds and to dump salary, hahaha)

Im pretty sure we have seen it, but dont remember the details. Also those trades are typically in “good draft years” and not “weak draft years”… which supposedly this is a weak one.

I dont think a team is going to trade a future 1st for a current one unless they like what the board looks like when the pick is on the clock. At that point what is important is the available players not the # of the selection.

[FNQ]

Very strange that a contract that would cost less than 2m for several years would be the financial breaking point

I don’t buy it, but if it is true, that doesn’t bode well for keeping Wiggins, Poole, GP2, and Looney

Not really.

I dont skip buying coffee cause i need that money to pay my mortgage, i skip buying coffee cause its not worth it to me.

Punting the pick is basically saying this coffee sucks, ima wait till theres some good coffee to buy.

If they look at this draft and dont think they can find someone who can contribute in 1-2 years at 28, thats even worse tbh. This whole "its not a good draft"... that's bull. Every draft is the best or worst one ever, but that is typically only true about whats at the top. In the middle and end, its all about finding players who fit the scheme of what you're trying to do - at least for winning teams. For losing teams, its just selecting high upside and holding your breath. But there are always quality role players in the late 1st, whole 2nd, and even in UDFA. Waiving a white flag on that pre-draft makes no sense.

But as I said, I don't buy it. I've heard a lot to the contrary. Only thing that would make sense is using it in a deal with a different goal, which I do think is possible. But punting it out a year or more... there's no sense to that at any level