RealGM

Simple trade:

Portland trades: Simons+14+34 for Lonzo (expiring)+8+Rights to its future first back (via Bulls)
Spurs trade: Keldon Johnson+8 for Simons+11
Bulls trade: Lonzo+11+Future Portland 1st for Keldon Johnson+14+34

Why for the Spurs?
1) They get a proven backcourt scorer in Simons whose defensive shortcomings would be mitigated by Wemby.

Why for the Blazers?
1). They move up in the draft and get their pick back to give more flexibility. Saving roughly 4 million in instant cash helps with potential tax issues as well.

Why for the Bulls?
1). They don't seem to want to rebuild. Getting a playable big wing in Keldon Johnson (something they lack right now with Pat Williams not extended longterm) instead of the unplayable Lonzo improves the team right away.
2). Moving down from 11 to 14 and picking an early 2nd for a future Portland first that is unlikely to convey ever with the strength of the West isn't a huge loss.

It's not terrible. Depends if SA really likes anyone at #8.

I know Simons isn't popular around these parts, but I think most Blazers fans aren't going to find that moving up six spots in this draft, the return of a first round pick that may never convey anyway (might convey as a second), and completely dead salary in Lonzo as sufficient return for Simons.

On paper this makes sense for the Spurs, Simons fits a need and the price of moving back from 8 to 11 doesn't sound like too much unless they have a specific target they're unwilling to compromise.

I'm not okay with trading Johnson in this deal. The Spurs have ample means to acquire a PG (in fact, they already have one). They only have one option for sixth man and still need a starting forward before factoring in losing their bench forward. The Spurs need to increase the number of decent NBA players on their team before they spend assets to maybe improve on the few they already have.

I'm not sure why the Spurs don't like Johnson (if that's true)
I like this as a Bulls' fan, a lot

pipfan wrote:I'm not sure why the Spurs don't like Johnson (if that's true)
I like this as a Bulls' fan, a lot

RGM has a weird view of Johnson where some folks clearly like him and want to trade him to various teams while others are set on believing no team wants him. I think there's a disconnect between what he's making and what that money used to signify. Keldon is set to make $19M, $17.5M and then $17.5M for the next three years. It's a tidy contract for a limited but still useful player. The Spurs would be worse off not having it, and plenty of teams would be better off with it.

Honestly, almost all of the speculation about the Spurs seems to be from media members who are trying to create a market for their ideas by speculating and then passing off that speculation as a report. That's obviously true for microscopic presences like that Eric Zhang guy and for long discredited hacks like Amico. But it's also true for ESPN who wants Wemby on a competitive team with another marketable name so badly that they're getting their guys like Windhorst, Lowe and Givonny to talk about what they've "heard" but speak about that so insubstantially that it doesn't mean anything. For example, they'll talk about how the Spurs don't want to be bad next year or how Wemby wants to compete, both of which are pretty safe bets. But they'll use that as support for why the Spurs must be interested in Young/Garland, or in trading their picks this year for win-now players. It's just hiding the ball.

And of course, people keep giving a level of foreknowledge to Vegas odds and try to use that as evidence of interest. In reality, what Vegas "knows" is that people want the Spurs to make a move and are going to be more primed to bet on them doing that than another team for the reasons I said above. They are about the perception, not the reality, and the perception has been manufactured.

pipfan wrote:I'm not sure why the Spurs don't like Johnson (if that's true)
I like this as a Bulls' fan, a lot

He's a 3 and no D specialist who shoots below league-average from 3. He's played 5 full seasons in the NBA and there's been very little, if any, growth in the rest of his game. He's gotten plenty of run. He's paid more than the MLE. I think the better question is why would an objective, professional front office ascribe positive value to him.

The Graduate wrote:I know Simons isn't popular around these parts, but I think most Blazers fans aren't going to find that moving up six spots in this draft, the return of a first round pick that may never convey anyway (might convey as a second), and completely dead salary in Lonzo as sufficient return for Simons.

Pretty spot on. This isn’t quite what we’re looking for.

Simons for 8 pick across with no other context is a little closer. He’s a top 10 sg who could very well see an asg or two on the right team.. we’d like some value for that

Even as a Lonzo Ball fan who thinks he could be back, I'm almost ready to do this. Because on paper, ror screen, this loks like an absolute steal for the Bulls.

Moving down from #11 to #14 no big deal, getting #34 pretty good for a team with no 2nds for the next 100 years. The PORT pick doesn't look like it's ever coming. Hard for me to quit on Lonzo because he's never complained during the 2 1/2 years out and brings so much.

OK Johnson isn't a perfect fit. Listed at 6-5 he's a SF, with or without DeRozan and/or Patrick Williams the Bulls still need a PF. The lack of defense cited above is a problem for a Bulls team with some less than stellar defenders. The Bulls could resign Williams for less try him at the SF position that they haven't used him at and he brings very very strong defense.

I think I'd do this after the Bulls bring in a genuine PF, and move on from DeRozan and Lavine. Then look at starting that PF with Williams at the SF, Johnson at the SG having Dosumnu come off the bench at Guard while Williams takes the minutes at the backup PF slot and Johnson takes the backup SF role.

Good proposal. I can see something like this ocurring.