Simple, not especially consequential, but nonetheless potentially beneficial ATL|MEM trade

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Tony Snell ($12m, 1 yr remaining) and his consistent 40% arc stroke (4 yrs running) to MEM

for

Gorgui Dieng ($17m, 1 yr remaining) and his strong defense to ATL

Why for ATL: We have ample offense as-is, and Capela (out with a foot injury for much of last season) is really the lone proven high-regard rim protector on the roster. Yes, Okongwu is there, but on a team serious about a playoff run, conventional wisdom is to force rookies to develop and to earn minutes, ie, rather than be given them by default.

Why for MEM: Snell is a superior veteran player offensively to Winslow and Brooks, and what's more, he's not been the injury risk that either of those have been. And it certainly isn't a bad thing when you can chop $5m off your payroll sheet. As for replacing Dieng, it's true that moving Dieng would give Tillman and Jontay Porter some extra PT, but even if that's not appealing, this is one of those years where some viable bench talent still hasn't gotten signed--e.g., Henson, and too, Vonleh is back on the market.

[Texas Chuck]

Seems like both teams probably would like to see how what they have plays out first, but on the surface it seems reasonable enough. But at a minimum the Grizzlies need to wait until JJJ returns.

[E S V L]

5m is a decent incentive if Memphis FO has something in mind down the road. Otherwise, it’s just as boring as meh. Nah.

[Buzzard]

I prefer keeping Snell as injury insurance while also giving the rookie Okongwu some minutes. I see it as fair value both ways though.

[psman2]

As Chuck alluded to until JJJ is back we need Dieng more than we need Snell by a rather large margin. However once JJJ is back I would be fine saving the 5m and having the "superior veteran player offensively" sit on my bench and hopefully never getting a minute of play.

[Buzzard]

As Chuck alluded to until JJJ is back we need Dieng more than we need Snell by a rather large margin. However once JJJ is back I would be fine saving the 5m and having the "superior veteran player offensively" sit on my bench and hopefully never getting a minute of play.

I do understand Memphis need for big man depth. From a Hawks perspective, I am not comfortable trading Snell for a bench player who will take minutes away from Fernando and Okongwu. Capela, Gallinari, and Collins are doing a adequate job of that already.

I am looking forward to tonight's game. Even without JJJ, Memphis gave the Timberwolves a thrashing. I hope the Hawks make it a better game

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

As Chuck alluded to until JJJ is back we need Dieng more than we need Snell by a rather large margin. However once JJJ is back I would be fine saving the 5m and having the "superior veteran player offensively" sit on my bench and hopefully never getting a minute of play.

I get it that you'd prefer to see Winslow re-establish himself as on the positive trajectory toward plausibly becoming a top-tier SF in the league. That's well taken.

The phrasing here leaves me to wonder if, in citing that quote, there's a hint of sarcasm intended (?). Am I missing something that would suggest Snell wouldn't be, at least, a regular rotation piece, and quite plausibly a starter option in the event that it turns out that hopes for Winslow, and for that matter Brooks, evolve to be misplaced... ? And specifically, that he's actually not a "superior veteran player offensively"... ? If so, I'm all eyes/ears if there's some debunking needed to my description.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

5m is a decent incentive if Memphis FO has something in mind down the road. Otherwise, it’s just as boring as meh. Nah.

Well-taken.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Seems like both teams probably would like to see how what they have plays out first, but on the surface it seems reasonable enough. But at a minimum the Grizzlies need to wait until JJJ returns.

Maybe so. But even from a Hawks perspective, it's tempting to, instead, go get Vonleh instead of making this trade.

If I were Griz, I imagine that's exactly what I'd do... take advantage to add some offense to the wing, give myself some new payroll relief, and sign Vonleh (or Henson) who aren't chopped liver actually to take up the void.

[psman2]

As Chuck alluded to until JJJ is back we need Dieng more than we need Snell by a rather large margin. However once JJJ is back I would be fine saving the 5m and having the "superior veteran player offensively" sit on my bench and hopefully never getting a minute of play.

I get it that you'd prefer to see Winslow re-establish himself as on the positive trajectory toward plausibly becoming a top-tier SF in the league. That's well taken.

The phrasing here leaves me to wonder if, in citing that quote, there's a hint of sarcasm intended (?). Am I missing something that would suggest Snell wouldn't be, at least, a regular rotation piece, and quite plausibly a starter option in the event that it turns out that hopes for Winslow, and for that matter Brooks, evolve to be misplaced... ? And specifically, that he's actually not a "superior veteran player offensively"... ? If so, I'm all eyes/ears if there's some debunking needed to my description.

Snell is a very limited offensive player. He takes open 3 and makes them at a good clip, and is not a liability on D, that is the sum of his total game. Otherwise he is a zero on offense, he does nothing else better than Brooks or Winslow. Melton, Allen and Anderson would all be ahead of him in the rotation. Bane would get minutes ahead of him too as a rookie we want to develop. He would be a break in case of emergency player just like he is going to be for Atlanta that wants to develop younger players that have higher upside and more diverse games. There is a reason he was salary dumped for a 1st and bounced around his whole career.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Snell is a very limited offensive player. He takes open 3 and makes them at a good clip, and is not a liability on D, that is the sum of his total game. Otherwise he is a zero on offense, he does nothing else better than Brooks or Winslow. Melton, Allen and Anderson would all be ahead of him in the rotation. Bane would get minutes ahead of him too as a rookie we want to develop. He would be a break in case of emergency player. There is a reason he was salary dumped for a 1st and bounced around his whole career.

Good to see that my sarcasm detection thingee in my prefrontal cortex is working well.

1) "Very limited offensive player"... dunno what you'd point to that makes him "limited"... all I know is he's been productive. So productive that MIL dealt for him to fill the void when Middleton went down for the year to be their starter, and even after Middleton got back, he still went from receiving the 2nd most minutes on the roster overall in 16-17 to the 4th most in 17-18. There was never a time when he was with MIL that he was not either a wing starter or the first wing off the bench. There was never a time in DET that he wasn't a starter.



2) "He takes open 3 and makes them at a good clip"... agreed.

3) "Is not a liability on D"... Um. Full disclosure? I mean, since it's just us talking, and this will never actually affect whether a trade happens anyhow, right?

He actually is a liability on D. He is one of those players who has somehow been blessed with the general perception that his D is adequate. Numbers say otherwise. Now, I know the response to that is defensive metrics are not to be trusted--what's on tape isn't always borne out by objective numbers. My response is this. It's one thing if some of the defensive metrics make a player look like he's less than adequate. It's another when, for all intents and purposes, they all do.

(I'm not saying I've done an exhaustive study of it, but I am saying I've done a lot of study on it, considerably more than I would have ever imagined I would, and unfortunately that's what I've found.)

4) "He does nothing else better than Brooks or Winslow. Melton, Allen and Anderson would all be ahead of him in the rotation. Bane would get minutes ahead of him too as a rookie we want to develop. He would be a break in case of emergency player..."... See #1.

Honestly? Think there's some latitude for debate, and won't dismiss that you could be right in all or most of that, but there are legit reasons to believe you could be wrong in all or most of that.

Certainly think you go overboard to declare him an emergency player. That'd be a tough conclusion for anyone to defend with any objective support.

Here's what was said about him by one non-passionate (ie, to this conversation) writer following this season:



5) "There is a reason he was salary dumped for a 1st "... Um. Maybe mixing up Snell with someone else? Yes, MIL did let him go mainly in the interest of creating more cap space to keep Middleton and Giannis. Not sure that's saying much--a whole lot of otherwise-legitimate players would have been treated similarly in that particular scenario. Here's how it was discussed by someone analyzing that trade (which, btw though it doesn't really matter, didn't involve a 1st)...



6) "and bounced around his whole career."... To be fair to you, ATL will be his third team in three seasons, and it's entirely likely that he will be playing for a 4th this time next year.

To be fair to him, previous to being dealt to DET, he'd been an up-and-comer piece in CHI for his first 3 years, then after one year in MIL, received a shiny new 4 year commitment... which effectively said, "we like what we see and we think we're smart to keep you around for awhile."

Then, as said previously, his salary became the most obvious one to shed in light of the greater priorities on MIL's agenda.

So... "bounced around?"... a qualified yes and a qualified no. Most recently, yes. But not his "whole career." Three years in CHI, followed by three years in MIL... not that unusual for a player to have two stops in six years, which just 18 months ago, was exactly his situation.

(Tying a bow on top... yeah, it's a slow day at work, as it is every year at this time.)

[babyjax13]

As Chuck alluded to until JJJ is back we need Dieng more than we need Snell by a rather large margin. However once JJJ is back I would be fine saving the 5m and having the "superior veteran player offensively" sit on my bench and hopefully never getting a minute of play.

I get it that you'd prefer to see Winslow re-establish himself as on the positive trajectory toward plausibly becoming a top-tier SF in the league. That's well taken.

The phrasing here leaves me to wonder if, in citing that quote, there's a hint of sarcasm intended (?). Am I missing something that would suggest Snell wouldn't be, at least, a regular rotation piece, and quite plausibly a starter option in the event that it turns out that hopes for Winslow, and for that matter Brooks, evolve to be misplaced... ? And specifically, that he's actually not a "superior veteran player offensively"... ? If so, I'm all eyes/ears if there's some debunking needed to my description.

I assume it's mostly directed at the idea that Snell is a better offensive player than Brooks. Winslow also has his uses as a ball mover, slasher, driver, etc. Snell can hit open threes at a decent volume, but that's kind of a new thing (the volume is) and he does nothing else. I do agree that when JJJ returns this could make some sense for Memphis. Per ATL, though, I don't see it. Just sign a center for the minimum. Surely Noah (or any other random center) could be just fine for them if they need a backup veteran center.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

To be fair, again, to Snell... he's not just a Bertans or a Korver type who pretty much finds a space on the arc and awaits a pass every possession...

Watch on YouTube

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Per ATL, though, I don't see it. Just sign a center for the minimum. Surely Noah (or any other random center) could be just fine for them if they need a backup veteran center.

...even from a Hawks perspective, it's tempting to, instead, go get Vonleh instead of making this trade.

My opinion is that Dieng is an appreciable and significant improvement over Vonleh or Henson, who I consider to be the best defensive big assets currently available.

But I would pursue this trade with MEM only if I felt I could obtain a wing with some considerable defensive regard. For instance, if Rondae Hollis-Jefferson would end up not making the cut in MIN (probably will), that would be enough. Just enough, though. I wouldn't go for anything less.

[VCfor3]

I'm fine with the trade though agree that waiting till JJJ comes back would be good. It is a small trade around the borders for both teams that isn't a big deal either way. ATL gets an improved backup C. Memphis gets a 5m TPE that maybe they can use to get a 2nd or something in a small salary dump.

[psman2]

To be fair, again, to Snell... he's not just a Bertans or a Korver type who pretty much finds a space on the arc and awaits a pass every possession...

Watch on YouTube

The guy is a career has a career average of 6.5 pts a game. His per 36 is 10.3. If you want to call that a productive player then more power to you. He is a NBA player that should see minutes on a team that doesn't have better options or trying to develop younger players. I have stated that I believe that yes our players are better and we also have younger players we want to develop.

If he is such a good productive offensive player then why is he not playing ahead of Reddish, Hunter, and Huerter? His TS%$ blows those guys away. Your team has a better chance of making the playoffs than ours, he seems like he should have a chance of starting for you if you truely believe what your typing.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Dang. Because my Hawks are automatically firewalled now from getting him for a year (traded and released), I plain forgot the big on the free agent market still who almost certainly would fill the Dieng void to many, if not most Griz fans' satisfaction...



(...at least one Lakers blogger was hoping he'd land there...)

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

If he is such a good productive offensive player then why is he not playing ahead of Reddish, Hunter, and Huerter?

Reddish and Hunter? You mean the guys we just drafted in the top 10 in the previous draft?

That's a statement wrapped in a question.

As for Huerter, there's nothing to say he won't get as much or more time than Huerter necessarily. We'd like to think, of course, that Huerter will prove too good to allow that. It's an open question, but I'm an optimist at heart.

(We're fairly far apart, I suppose, but at the very least I'd like to think you could concede the "emergency" player label was a bit much.)

[psman2]

If he is such a good productive offensive player then why is he not playing ahead of Reddish, Hunter, and Huerter?

Reddish and Hunter? You mean the guys we just drafted in the top 10 in the previous draft?

That's a statement wrapped in a question.

As for Huerter, there's nothing to say he won't get as much or more time than Huerter necessarily. We'd like to think, of course, that Huerter will prove too good to allow that. It's an open question, but I'm an optimist at heart.

(We're fairly far apart, I suppose, but at the very least I'd like to think you could concede the "emergency" player label was a bit much.)

Yes your young players are more highly touted due to draft position but have yet to prove to be any better than our guys. Our front office gave Brooks his extension because the believe in him as a player. Our team gave up the the equivalent of 2 to 3 1sts to acquire Winslow. You can argue that either of those decision were good or bad but I don't think you can argue that our FA and coaches would bench either of those guys to start Snell.

No I wouldn't concede the "emergency" player label was a bit much.

Memphis wing rotation of Brooks, Winslow, Melton, Anderson, Bane, Allen and with Clarke also getting spot minutes at the 3 would leave Snell out of the rotation. He would be the 13-15 man on our team just like Dieng likely will be when we are at full strength. And no I don't think in this develop year we would sour on enough of these guys to give Snell rotation minutes. He is the poster board for "emergency" player label for a team like ours.

Put him on a veteran playoff team that just needs some spot minutes covered and don't want to develop younger guys then yes I could see him with a 15 minute role. That is not Memphis.

[Prospect Dong]

I'm fine with the trade though agree that waiting till JJJ comes back would be good. It is a small trade around the borders for both teams that isn't a big deal either way. ATL gets an improved backup C. Memphis gets a 5m TPE that maybe they can use to get a 2nd or something in a small salary dump.

This is about where I come out. It seems Memphis is less all-in on JJJ at the 5 than, say, I am, and they prioritise having a second true C on the roster behind JV. Several of the young guys could hopefully grow into that role this season, but I'm not really keen on relying on undrafted FAs and second round rookies straight out of the gate.

But, as you say, Dieng is a pretty ridiculous luxury as (effectively) a third string C, and we're very light on veteran shooting on the wings. I'd very happily do this once JJJ is back and, like VC, probably go ahead and do it now and replace Dieng with an unsigned big body - though roster space is an issue.

More broadly: good trade, good research, good discussion. Thanks. I'm glad your work isn't keeping you busy