Chicago/Sacramento/Houston When DJJ can be aggregated

Post #1 » by **Texas Chuck** » Tue Sep 14, 2021 5:27 pm

Chicago trades: DJJ/White/22 POR 1st(top 14 until 28 then converts to 28 POR 2nd)
Chicago gets: Barnes

Sacramento trades: Barnes
Sacramento gets: Jones/House/22 POR 1st(top 14)/Worse of 22 MIA/BKN 1st(top 14 turns into worse of 22 PHI/DEN 2nd)

Houston trades: House/Worse of 22 MIA/BKN 1st(top 14 turns into worse of 22 PHI/DEN 2nd)
Houston gets: White

Chicago turns White and a lotto protected 1st into the forward they need to complete their lineup. His declining salary helpful moving forward.

Sacramento gets 2 late 1sts, a lot of financial flexibility and a couple of stopgap guys to take Barnes rotation minutes for a year

Houston gives up their least valuable future 1st and House to take a look at White for a couple years. They have a lot of young players, but not one like White.

Post #2 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Tue Sep 14, 2021 5:34 pm

Value makes sense for Sacramento, in theory, but I’m not sure the fit/direction do. With both picks being well protected, there’s not a ton of upside on those picks, so I think they may wish to keep shopping Barnes and hope to get just 1 pick that is more likely to convert earlier, and maybe a bit better? If that makes sense?

I do agree that dealing Barnes makes sense for them in many ways.

For Houston, I’m not sure they would want to give up any 1sts, even well protected, for another young guard on a rookie deal that would clearly fall behind KPJ and Green, and would likely fall behind their development priority of Josh Christopher, too. Though, it’s probably good enough value it might be worth considering in terms of competition for all the young guys?

For Chicago, seems like a very affordable price to pay for a clear win now upgrade in Barnes.

vxmike · Post #3 » by **vxmike** » Tue Sep 14, 2021 5:47 pm

Like the fit for Chicago but I don’t see them giving up both Coby White and a FRP. Only if White is considered to have almost no value.

Post #4 » by **Texas Chuck** » Tue Sep 14, 2021 5:51 pm

vxmike wrote:Like the fit for Chicago but I don’t see them giving up both Coby White and a FRP. Only if White is considered to have almost no value.

Valued him at a late 1st fwiw. Just tried to find a 3rd team for him since the Kings wouldn't value him thusly with their current crop of young guards.

I struggle with how to value Barnes, but figured two 1sts with no chance to be in the lottery was a pretty reasonable offer especially with no future money.

babyjax13 · Post #5 » by **babyjax13** » Tue Sep 14, 2021 6:28 pm

With Fox/Haliburton/Mitchell all needing minutes at the 1/2, I don't see a spot for White on that team. I like him, but I think all of Sac's guys are likely better (we don't know about Mitchell yet, but I think there is a reasonable expectation that he's at least a better two-way player).

ChettheJet · Post #6 » by **ChettheJet** » Tue Sep 14, 2021 7:26 pm

Bulls are giving up too much not only for Barnes but they stunt the growth of Patrick Williams for a veteran who on the surface should start because scores more but the Bulls aren't in need of more of a scorer at the 4 when they have Lavine, Vucevic, DeRozan and Ball all perfectly able to score from 18 to 27 points. Putting Barnes on the second unit makes him a very expensive backup, who a team that has traded 3 1st round picks can't afford to swap a replacement pick that they just got for a backup.

Kurt Heimlich · Post #7 » by **Kurt Heimlich** » Tue Sep 14, 2021 9:21 pm

Value looks woeful for the Bulls. And Barnes salary locks the bulls into the luxury tax which is certainly a non starter for a player of his calibre and a bulls ownership with their proclivities.

Resistance · Post #8 » by **Resistance** » Tue Sep 14, 2021 9:34 pm

For White to have first round pick value, the team trading for him needs to be thinking of him as at least a strong sixth man or more likely a starter.

SNPA · Post #9 » by **SNPA** » Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:56 am

Makes no sense with Sac’s stated direction.

Post #10 » by **Texas Chuck** » Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:07 am

SNPA wrote:Makes no sense with Sac’s stated direction.

I don't know what their stated direction is but I'm guessing by your comments its to win now. I don't see how you win now with that frontcourt so I'm selling since the team doesn't appear to be a playoff team.

Now if you are telling me instead they are adding assets to Buddy to deal for a starting forward, I definitely love that idea. But without fixing the frontcourt I'm not buying they have any real chance to win this year.

SNPA · Post #11 » by **SNPA** » Wed Sep 15, 2021 7:04 am

Texas Chuck wrote:
SNPA wrote:Makes no sense with Sac’s stated direction.

I don't know what their stated direction is but I'm guessing by your comments its to win now. I don't see how you win now with that frontcourt so I'm selling since the team doesn't appear to be a playoff team.

Now if you are telling me instead they are adding assets to Buddy to deal for a starting forward, I definitely love that idea. But without fixing the frontcourt I'm not buying they have any real chance to win this year.

I agree that packaging Buddy for a forward is best, but parting out Barnes for future assets is the opposite direction. Now, if they pull a 180 then this is the type of deal that makes sense but you know being on this board daily that Sac has a lot of reason to want to win now and make the playoffs. Trading Barnes for parts doesn’t align.

DroseReturnChi · Post #12 » by **DroseReturnChi** » Wed Sep 15, 2021 7:06 am

barnes isnt that good and djj is an expiring not some 40mil john wall level. kings are getting 2 picks which is steep.

DroseReturnChi · Post #13 » by **DroseReturnChi** » Wed Sep 15, 2021 7:10 am

Texas Chuck wrote:
vxmike wrote:Like the fit for Chicago but I don’t see them giving up both Coby White and a FRP. Only if White is considered to have almost no value.

Valued him at a late 1st fwiw. Just tried to find a 3rd team for him since the Kings wouldn't value him thusly with their current crop of young guards.

I struggle with how to value Barnes, but figured two 1sts with no chance to be in the lottery was a pretty reasonable offer especially with no future money.

valuing late first is fine as he is my most disliked prospect. but to say portland 1st like late first and lump with late 1st is not true at all. the chance it lands at 15-20 is 99% and that is very valuable for mid round pick.