RealGM

I think the buyers were known

It turns out that Pistons, Wizards, Jazz, Grizz, Spurs and Hornets were the sellers.

Raptors, Hawks, Bulls, Blazers, GSW were not selling though.
These 5 had some reason to at least sell a little, if anything Raptors ended up being a buyer.

It was a seller's market, is it realistic to think you could get a better offer than in a seller's market?

Should these teams have just traded the players they had on the block for assets?

I think one issue is that there’s not a ton of tradeabke first round picks right now, given so many have been moved already. This summer teams like Dallas and the Lakers will have 2 more to trade, so teams with assets (Brogdon, Grant, Murray etc) might be thinking they’ll get better offers then. It’s underwhelming for us but probably the right move for a few.

I'm a bit disappointed but was it really a sellers market? No one seems like they were giving up big value or pressured to make big moves. Lots of little around the edges type deals. Just doesn't seem like many teams with assets to burn. At least nothing where I'm like dang we missed out.

Sellers were the obvious ones. Bulls are the more puzzling case, I don't know what it is they're trying to accomplish. Seems like management is trying to keep their jobs as long as they can rather than thinking on the long term future of the franchise.

Think a twin threads of wrong not to buy makes sense.

But yes, I think Bulls should have sold. They have to enter a rebuild at some point. Ball’s injury (and LaVine not being a two way player) killed this team. They should have started the reset and let Toronto or Brooklyn pass them this season.

Think Wizards should have gotten value for Kuz and Portland for Brogdon and Grant.. (Brogdon should’ve been traded for a couple 2nds..)

But without knowing what the buyers offered, we can’t know if it would’ve been worth it. Like if Washington could’ve got the 2027 Dallas first and Dallas ended up with Kuz and Gafford, salaries could’ve worked with THJ/Wright? (I didn’t check my math)… then Washington definitely should have sold. But if there were only offers of 2nds or something? Then Wiz were smart to sit and wait out Kuz’s declining contract.. hope to catch Dallas desperate in 6 months..

The Bulls should've blown it all up for sure instead of going for play in

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:I'm a bit disappointed but was it really a sellers market? No one seems like they were giving up big value or pressured to make big moves. Lots of little around the edges type deals. Just doesn't seem like many teams with assets to burn. At least nothing where I'm like dang we missed out.

Agreed. There were no buyers, or rather, there were no buyers who actually had assets to work with. The teams with all of the picks (OKC, UTA, NOP) weren't buying. And a bunch of teams who wanted to buy had no assets to buy with (PHX, MIL, LAC, MIN, DEN), or had already made their move (MIA, NYK).

jarryd3107 wrote:I think one issue is that there’s not a ton of tradeabke first round picks right now, given so many have been moved already. This summer teams like Dallas and the Lakers will have 2 more to trade, so teams with assets (Brogdon, Grant, Murray etc) might be thinking they’ll get better offers then. It’s underwhelming for us but probably the right move for a few.

Well plenty of teams had tradeable FRPs and didn't offer more. They also had other means to offer value, like FRP swaps. OKC was willing to move off FRPs for valuable swaps. So Lakers and Dallas could (Dallas did) offer multiple FRPs up at the deadline.

I don't think it was assets that held them back.

zimpy27 wrote:

jarryd3107 wrote:I think one issue is that there’s not a ton of tradeabke first round picks right now, given so many have been moved already. This summer teams like Dallas and the Lakers will have 2 more to trade, so teams with assets (Brogdon, Grant, Murray etc) might be thinking they’ll get better offers then. It’s underwhelming for us but probably the right move for a few.

Well plenty of teams had tradeable FRPs and didn't offer more. They also had other means to offer value, like FRP swaps. OKC was willing to move off FRPs for valuable swaps. So Lakers and Dallas could (Dallas did) offer multiple FRPs up at the deadline.

I don't think it was assets that held them back.

Right but almost every team is getting 1 or 2 more tradeable picks this summer. If I’m selling an asset do I sell know or wait for when there’s more draft equity in the market?

jarryd3107 wrote:

zimpy27 wrote:

jarryd3107 wrote:I think one issue is that there’s not a ton of tradeabke first round picks right now, given so many have been moved already. This summer teams like Dallas and the Lakers will have 2 more to trade, so teams with assets (Brogdon, Grant, Murray etc) might be thinking they’ll get better offers then. It’s underwhelming for us but probably the right move for a few.

Well plenty of teams had tradeable FRPs and didn't offer more. They also had other means to offer value, like FRP swaps. OKC was willing to move off FRPs for valuable swaps. So Lakers and Dallas could (Dallas did) offer multiple FRPs up at the deadline.

I don't think it was assets that held them back.

Right but almost every team is getting 1 or 2 more tradeable picks this summer. If I’m selling an asset do I sell know or wait for when there’s more draft equity in the market?

Yeah I think so. Cap just shrunk to $141m, teams were expecting $150m. These deals are $20m+, it's hard to justify spending that money on a player that isn't your best player or 2nd best player. And teams this deadline were paying for the services for this coming playoffs. Those players have 1 less playoff run possibility on their contracts

I think it's more likely that they just hold on to the player to save face.

Raptors should have traded Brown for a pick. Oh well life moves on.

Its not the first time Masai stubbornly didnt sell sigh

Godaddycurse wrote:Raptors should have traded Brown for a pick. Oh well life moves on.

Its not the first time Masai stubbornly didnt sell sigh

But he can pick up the option for next season and auction him this summer. The Olynk deal was a headscratcher though.

jarryd3107 wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:Raptors should have traded Brown for a pick. Oh well life moves on.

Its not the first time Masai stubbornly didnt sell sigh

But he can pick up the option for next season and auction him this summer. The Olynk deal was a headscratcher though.

Brown is clearly more valuable with the playoff run and team option in the hands of a team paying for him.

Getting to offseason and dropping or picking up option makes him neutral IMO.

zimpy27 wrote:

jarryd3107 wrote:

zimpy27 wrote:
Well plenty of teams had tradeable FRPs and didn't offer more. They also had other means to offer value, like FRP swaps. OKC was willing to move off FRPs for valuable swaps. So Lakers and Dallas could (Dallas did) offer multiple FRPs up at the deadline.

I don't think it was assets that held them back.

Right but almost every team is getting 1 or 2 more tradeable picks this summer. If I’m selling an asset do I sell know or wait for when there’s more draft equity in the market?

Yeah I think so. Cap just shrunk to $141m, teams were expecting $150m. These deals are $20m+, it's hard to justify spending that money on a player that isn't your best player or 2nd best player. And teams this deadline were paying for the services for this coming playoffs. Those players have 1 less playoff run possibility on their contracts

I think it's more likely that they just hold on to the player to save face.

I disagree. The teams that are very bad (blazers, wiz, hornets, spurs, pistons) are already bad enough to be high in the lottery, so they don’t really need to sell now if the offers weren’t strong. If im the blazers, do I take 1 far away first for Brogdon or Grant now? Or do I wait for teams to have more picks and space? Maybe Philly pay 2 1sts for one of them and take them directly in to their cap space?

I think we’re so used to franchises making dumb moves that we see widespread restraint and don’t know what to make of it.

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:I'm a bit disappointed but was it really a sellers market? No one seems like they were giving up big value or pressured to make big moves. Lots of little around the edges type deals. Just doesn't seem like many teams with assets to burn. At least nothing where I'm like dang we missed out.

This is it, anemic on both the buyer and seller sides. I was surprised that the Lakers and Warriors weren’t more motivated to make moves. Maybe that’s just a sign that both FOs see their respective windows as closed… if so, why would they burn assets at this point.

zimpy27 wrote:

jarryd3107 wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:Raptors should have traded Brown for a pick. Oh well life moves on.

Its not the first time Masai stubbornly didnt sell sigh

But he can pick up the option for next season and auction him this summer. The Olynk deal was a headscratcher though.

Brown is clearly more valuable with the playoff run and team option in the hands of a team paying for him.

Getting to offseason and dropping or picking up option makes him neutral IMO.

He will be a useful salary ballast in a trade with a contending team, as opposed to pure salary filler like bertans.

I think if raptors pick conveys this year we will trade him and tank again. If we keep our pick i wont be surprised if we just keep him to try and make the play in when we dont own our pick next year

SkyHook wrote:

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:I'm a bit disappointed but was it really a sellers market? No one seems like they were giving up big value or pressured to make big moves. Lots of little around the edges type deals. Just doesn't seem like many teams with assets to burn. At least nothing where I'm like dang we missed out.

This is it, anemic on both the buyer and seller sides. I was surprised that the Lakers and Warriors weren’t more motivated to make moves. Maybe that’s just a sign that both FOs see their respective windows as closed… if so, why would they burn assets at this point.

I’m also surprised the Warriors didn’t make a move, although if you believe the reports we were trying to make a deal for Caruso and got rebuffed.

What and why would Warriors sell though?

Warriors are finally playing well with 6-3 in the last 9 games, including 4-1 on brutal 5 games in 7 days. Kuminga is stepping up as the 2nd option, Wiggins is waking up, and Green is improving the team defense. Hard to be a seller, when the team is playing well.

Warriors didn't have many players to sell either. They won't trade Klay for a legacy reason. It would take some significant assets to trade Wiggins, and he is averaging 14.8 pts / 55.4% FG / 42.3% 3pts / 4.9 rebs in the last 9 games. As long as he is being efficient and defending, Warriors have no reason to trade him. CP3 would be a tough one to sell, because Warriors need his expiring contract to go under the 2nd apron and possibly the luxury tax threshold. Kuminga and Podz are not available unless something real good is coming, Looney has his role, and I don't think other players are in high demand. They offered Moody + picks for Caruso, and Bulls asked for Kuminga, so that one fell through quickly. No reason to salary dump, since Warriors' salary would be in a reasonable shape. I didn't think many Warriors fans expect a firework today, and that's what happened.

Tough this year with a poor draft and just as bad free agency.

Teams were probably asking too much and 2024 picks have been reported as nearly worthless. There are some teams I am surprised didn't make moves, but I think if you look into the circumstances making trading during the summer makes way more sense.