RealGM

Hawks out: #1, 2025 Sac first, D. Murray
Hawks in: Mikal Bridges, #7

Why: Hawks drop from 1 to 7 and give up the 2025 Sac first to turn D. Murray into Mikal Bridges. They take one last shot at putting something together around Tigger Trae. They could offer to sub Hunter or Bogdan here is they want to keep Murray. They still get a good player at 7.

Nets out: M. Bridges, Ben Simmons
Nets in: Z. Lavine, D. Murray, #13, #14

Why:The nets cash in on Bridges and buy low on Lavine. They go from having no picks in the draft to getting 13 and 14.

Kings out: #13
Kings in: 2025 1st returned from the Hawks.

Why: The kings save money to use to resign Monk. They get their next year pick back so it is kind of a wash otherwise.

Blazers out: #7 and #14
Blazers in: #1

Why: The Blazers move up to #1 and get the player they want the most

Bulls out: Lavine
Bulls in: Simmons

Why: Bulls move off Lavine's long term money, this is likely the best offer.

Why

RE Hawks: I don't get how you come to this evalution. Do you have Mikal >>> Murray? I don't, they seem close in value. I think the Nets would easily trade #1 for Bridges, so this is then Murray + Sac 1st for #7? That doesn't seem right, no matter how you slice it.

RE Nets: If Bridges is worth what he is for Atlanta, then the Nets just take that package, either Murray++ or #1.

RE Kings: Not close for them. They can get a much better return here.

RE Blazers: Yeah, seems great for them.

RE Bulls: Seems fair

I would re-focus this deal on the Bridges/Atlanta portion or the Simmons/LaVine portion, but 5-teams is just too much here and because of that, the value is off.

The difference between offering Hunter, Bogdan, or Murray is pretty substantial.

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Hard for POR to say no to this.

Do you guys want Sarr's knee to fall apart or what?

Seeing as the Kings can only pay Monk a certain amount it doesn't make any sense to try and save money. And the Kings aren't going to send over a lottery pick for a pick that might not even convey. It most likely will, but it's no certainty.

It's really not within the realm of being close.

OxAndFox wrote:Seeing as the Kings can only pay Monk a certain amount it doesn't make any sense to try and save money. And the Kings aren't going to send over a lottery pick for a pick that might not even convey. It most likely will, but it's no certainty.

It's really not within the realm of being close.

How about if CHI send the LPFRP POR pick to SAC and POR sends #40 to CHI?

JRoy wrote:

OxAndFox wrote:Seeing as the Kings can only pay Monk a certain amount it doesn't make any sense to try and save money. And the Kings aren't going to send over a lottery pick for a pick that might not even convey. It most likely will, but it's no certainty.

It's really not within the realm of being close.

How about if CHI send the LPFRP POR pick to SAC and POR sends #40 to CHI?

That's better. But even then that is full lottery protected through 2028. I don't see the Blazers making the POs next season. Probably not the one after either.
So that puts it at either 2027 or 2028. Not that the Kings would be looking to make the selection on this pick, they would most likely deal it ASAP once all the picks are in play, but we're still talking value.

I think the Kings could get creative and deal this pick to NY.

#13 for '25 Milwaukee 1st and '25 Wash 1st.
While the Milwaukee 1st might not be that great and the Washington pick may not convey the upside is there.
It just depends on how the Kings want to go about it and what version of the many different ones is going to get them to their end goal, which is an all in move.

The Knicks could use all or some of #13/#24/#25 to move up or take a stab at multiple players to refresh the bench.

Colbinii wrote:RE Hawks: I don't get how you come to this evalution. Do you have Mikal >>> Murray? I don't, they seem close in value. I think the Nets would easily trade #1 for Bridges, so this is then Murray + Sac 1st for #7? That doesn't seem right, no matter how you slice it.

RE Nets: If Bridges is worth what he is for Atlanta, then the Nets just take that package, either Murray++ or #1.

RE Kings: Not close for them. They can get a much better return here.

RE Blazers: Yeah, seems great for them.

RE Bulls: Seems fair

I would re-focus this deal on the Bridges/Atlanta portion or the Simmons/LaVine portion, but 5-teams is just too much here and because of that, the value is off.

How would you see the valure for Hawks and Nets if it was Hunter or Bogdan instead of Murray?

If Ben Simmons is the offer I actually see the Bulls just keeping Lavine, letting him play until he can be called injured and have him sit. I have no problem taking the final year gamble on Lonzo Ball, he really wants to play if he's healthy. Even one season of Ben Simmons playing a few games, then not being mentally ready to continue then getting injured will get the FO fired because neither the fans nor owners will put up with that.

GoBobs wrote:

Colbinii wrote:RE Hawks: I don't get how you come to this evalution. Do you have Mikal >>> Murray? I don't, they seem close in value. I think the Nets would easily trade #1 for Bridges, so this is then Murray + Sac 1st for #7? That doesn't seem right, no matter how you slice it.

RE Nets: If Bridges is worth what he is for Atlanta, then the Nets just take that package, either Murray++ or #1.

RE Kings: Not close for them. They can get a much better return here.

RE Blazers: Yeah, seems great for them.

RE Bulls: Seems fair

I would re-focus this deal on the Bridges/Atlanta portion or the Simmons/LaVine portion, but 5-teams is just too much here and because of that, the value is off.

How would you see the valure for Hawks and Nets if it was Hunter or Bogdan instead of Murray?

It makes more sense, but the question would be, why are the Nets not just taking #1 themselves?