RealGM

Charlotte trades #6, Nick Richards
OKC trades #12, worst two 2025 1sts of PHI (top 6 prot), MIA (top 14 prot), UTA (top 10 prot), and the best of OKC/HOU (top 10 prot)/LAC), Ousmane Dieng... if only one of the picks convey somehow the second pick converts to the worst of OKC's 2026 picks

OKC combines some pieces they won't have minutes for, to move up for a top prospect. Charlotte moves back and gets multiple bites at the apple over the next couple drafts.

3 FRPs to move up 6 spots in such a weak draft is too much IMO. Presti gotta really love a guy at #6 to make this happen.

and no way they trade the best of 2026 FRP...LAC pick is unprotected.

2 FRPs and Dieng looks fair to me.

Yeah that’s just way too rich. I think 2 FRP and Dieng is too much too.

What's Dieng's worth anyway?

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:Yeah that’s just way too rich. I think 2 FRP and Dieng is too much too.

#12 + Giddey and a FRP for #6 ? I have no clue what is Josh value anymore.

BadWolf wrote:What's Dieng's worth anyway?

a pick in the 20-30 range if I had to guess. He's still very young.

Richards doesn't fit what OKC does. They would have no interest. If OKC wanted a center they would have traded their pick to Washington directly instead of sending it to Dallas and letting Dallas use it to add Gafford.

bring Jazz here?

Giddey+ 6 to Jazz

12+Dieng+Future FRP(Thunder )to Hornets

Markkanen to Thunder

I like the concept here. Just fine tune the value. And part of how I would do that is replace Richards with Williams.

Texas Chuck wrote:I like the concept here. Just fine tune the value. And part of how I would do that is replace Richards with Williams.

i assume you mean Grant

HornetJail wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:I like the concept here. Just fine tune the value. And part of how I would do that is replace Richards with Williams.

i assume you mean Grant

You know I do not. I mean Mark

Texas Chuck wrote:

HornetJail wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:I like the concept here. Just fine tune the value. And part of how I would do that is replace Richards with Williams.

i assume you mean Grant

You know I do not. I mean Mark

Well that's legitimately insane unless you think Mark is never playing basketball again.

If Giddey is really only worth one first, Dallas has a 2025 unprotected first? And an early 2nd..

OP looks like it’s way too great for Charlotte. A first for ever 2 spots? And then a prospect on top?

Giddey+12+change feels like a real offer to pay the Williams brothers if Cody going early but still there at 6.

HornetJail wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:

HornetJail wrote:i assume you mean Grant

You know I do not. I mean Mark

Well that's legitimately insane unless you think Mark is never playing basketball again.

So it's insane in a deal where the consensus is OKC is badly overpaying to suggest Charlotte adds value? And I didn't even say how else I might address value.

But you know it's insane. Good talk.

Is it insane because Mark is untouchable? Because he certainly hasn't done enough for him to be.
Is it insane because of value(even though I never finished the value?)? Seems unlikely since Williams can't be worth more than a non-lotto first himself.

I like the player--hence me suggesting OKC add him as a backup center. And its fine if Charlotte wants to keep and develop him. But it can't be insane to suggest trading him. Nobody in Charlotte should be untouchable at this point.

HornetJail wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:

HornetJail wrote:i assume you mean Grant

You know I do not. I mean Mark

Well that's legitimately insane unless you think Mark is never playing basketball again.

Not nearly as insane as OP

This draft would need to be a whole lot stronger for someone to pay the OP prices. But if you want to find some dialogue here then think of this more like a move from 16 to 10 and what that would typically cost in a better draft.

I think if OKC really wants someone they will pay to move up but even with their pick hoard they will only pay some much, and I don't other teams are going to be knocking down the door in the draft to move up much.

Texas Chuck wrote:

HornetJail wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:
You know I do not. I mean Mark

Well that's legitimately insane unless you think Mark is never playing basketball again.

So it's insane in a deal where the consensus is OKC is badly overpaying to suggest Charlotte adds value? And I didn't even say how else I might address value.

But you know it's insane. Good talk.

Is it insane because Mark is untouchable? Because he certainly hasn't done enough for him to be.
Is it insane because of value(even though I never finished the value?)? Seems unlikely since Williams can't be worth more than a non-lotto first himself.

I like the player--hence me suggesting OKC add him as a backup center. And its fine if Charlotte wants to keep and develop him. But it can't be insane to suggest trading him. Nobody in Charlotte should be untouchable at this point.

Charlotte would value him north of our 6th pick easily, based on what he's done when he's played. It would obviously be lower if there was long term damage to his back. He's showed enough on defense, on the boards, and as a finisher around the basket that he can be the center we've lacked for most of this franchise's existence.

On the other side, I wasn't aware Dieng was going to be valued like a 1st round pick, I'd happily keep him out of this if that's the case.

Charlotte might value him that highly, but I can't imagine any other team would see his value higher than the 6th pick. And it can't possibly be insane for me to say that.

Why would OKC trade a 20 year old with crazy physical tools for a 2nd round value when they don’t have any need to generate marginal assets?

Even if the offer was for a 1st in the 20s, there’s zero reason for OKC because they don’t need marginal assets. I’d rather take the long shot that Dieng develops and lose out on a “late 1st” so at a non-1st value he’s just going to be hanging out.

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:Why would OKC trade a 20 year old with crazy physical tools for a 2nd round value when they don’t have any need to generate marginal assets?

Even if the offer was for a 1st in the 20s, there’s zero reason for OKC because they don’t need marginal assets. I’d rather take the long shot that Dieng develops and lose out on a “late 1st” so at a non-1st value he’s just going to be hanging out.

So I have no idea how OKC values Dieng.
And I agree with you they have no need for marginal future assets so if they value him highly as a prospect, I agree continue to give him a roster spot.
But they also have more young players and draft picks coming than they can possibly roster, so its definitely logical to pick the guys you most believe in to keep and develop and open up roster spots for veteran upgrades and/or prospects you like better.

So the idea of Dieng in a deal even at a low valuation to me doesn't feel outrageous. I just can't speak at all to the specifcs of how he is valued.

But I know I don't have Mark Williams valued as a top 5 pick in this draft nor Dieng as a pick in the teens in this draft nor Jabari Walker now being valued as a first so I need to be careful here with other poster's players.