Washington needs help everywhere (except Coulibaly/Avdija). Getting #2 is good but with this draft is it really a player who make the difference? I guess if they get Risacher, maybe, but he duplicates Coulibaly/Avdija.
Washington trades Kuzma/Bagley/#2
Washington Giddey/Wallace/Barnes/#12/#13/25 FRP.
OKC trades Giddey/Wallace/#12/25 FRP
OKC receives Bagley/#2
Kings trade Barnes/#13
Kings receive Kuzma
At 2, OKC could land Clingan to have a huge defensive frontcourt. Or take Risacher and spread the floor more. Wallace is going to be a backup to Williams. The cost is low for a talent upgrade and balancing the roster.
Washington gets a PG and SG young enough to play with Coulibaly/Avdija. Washington also has the cap space to throw money at Claxton. That is a young team that can grow. Washington with 12 and 13 could get 2 of Holland, da Silva, Carter, Ware, Edey. Some of these are reaches but fit team need.
Kings are able to finally land Kuzma at the cost of #13. Kuzma is better than any pick at #13 on the Kings timeline.
Giddey is going to be a role player with SGA/Holmgren/Williams as the primaries. He is better as a PG than a SF.
Washington/OKC/Sacramento
Moderators: MoneyTalks41890, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck, BullyKing, Andre Roberstan, loserX, Trader_Joe, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger
Washington/OKC/Sacramento
-
- Bench Warmer
- Posts: 1,499
- And1: 477
- Joined: Feb 16, 2016
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 34,243
- And1: 21,854
- Joined: Feb 13, 2013
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
I don't see OKC trading Wallace and 2 picks to move up. Giddey + Picks should be more than enough.
Kings trade has been tossed around, sure.
Washington doesn't need to trade back, they need to hit on the top.
Kings trade has been tossed around, sure.
Washington doesn't need to trade back, they need to hit on the top.
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
- nate33
- Forum Mod - Wizards
- Posts: 70,006
- And1: 22,425
- Joined: Oct 28, 2002
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
This isn't a 3-way trade. It's two separate trades.
The WAS/SAC part has been discussed a lot. I'd do it from the Wizards perspective, but most Sacramento fans wouldn't unless the Wizards also include the #26, which I would be unwilling to do. Let's just say that the two sides are pretty close to agreement on the trade, but not quite there.
The OKC/WAS trade is new. I would do this from Washington's perspective. I don't really value Giddey much, but the #12 + 2025 pick + Wallace is enough for the #2 pick.
The WAS/SAC part has been discussed a lot. I'd do it from the Wizards perspective, but most Sacramento fans wouldn't unless the Wizards also include the #26, which I would be unwilling to do. Let's just say that the two sides are pretty close to agreement on the trade, but not quite there.
The OKC/WAS trade is new. I would do this from Washington's perspective. I don't really value Giddey much, but the #12 + 2025 pick + Wallace is enough for the #2 pick.
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 34,243
- And1: 21,854
- Joined: Feb 13, 2013
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
nate33 wrote:This isn't a 3-way trade. It's two separate trades.
The WAS/SAC part has been discussed a lot. I'd do it from the Wizards perspective, but most Sacramento fans wouldn't unless the Wizards also include the #26, which I would be unwilling to do. Let's just say that the two sides are pretty close to agreement on the trade, but not quite there.
Again, a couple 2nds back to Washington would easily fix the #26 inclusion

Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
-
- King of the Trade Board
- Posts: 20,872
- And1: 7,834
- Joined: Aug 05, 2012
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
Presti’s trade package feels like 2 in a normal draft. And we’ve heard for months this is not a normal draft.
Really decent sized overpay when asking for Wallace here
I think Sac and Washington should do their trade. It always gets bickered over for seconds/26th. But it’s close enough without the fluff that a deal should be worked out
Really decent sized overpay when asking for Wallace here
I think Sac and Washington should do their trade. It always gets bickered over for seconds/26th. But it’s close enough without the fluff that a deal should be worked out
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 15,948
- And1: 4,137
- Joined: May 27, 2004
- Location: Masalaland
-
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
Dont see anything outgoing for the Wiz that warrants this return
Deuteronomy 30:19 wrote:I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
- TGW
- RealGM
- Posts: 13,327
- And1: 6,692
- Joined: Oct 22, 2010
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
Giddey or Wallace...I don't see OKC moving both in a deal like this.
Some random troll wrote:Not to sound negative, but this team is owned by an arrogant cheapskate, managed by a moron and coached by an idiot. Recipe for disaster.
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,838
- And1: 869
- Joined: Jul 27, 2018
-
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
Feels like an overpay from OKC's perspective.
It's relevant, but I'm also curious - where would Wallace be picked in this draft? He was #10 last year, still 20 years old. Low usage and low volume but shot over 41% from 3, played excellent defense, and was extremely consistent.
It's relevant, but I'm also curious - where would Wallace be picked in this draft? He was #10 last year, still 20 years old. Low usage and low volume but shot over 41% from 3, played excellent defense, and was extremely consistent.
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,689
- And1: 1,364
- Joined: Oct 02, 2005
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
I’ve been crystal clear that a Barnes/filler/13 for Kuzma/26 and Wash 2nd is a pretty balanced deal.
I know most Kings fans here want it to be 2nds going back not 14 but I’m in favor of trading back anyway to lower our roster cost obligation going forward and I don’t feel that the drop off is that much.
I don’t understand the inclusion of OKC here at all because I don’t think that Wash should be moving off number 2.
I know most Kings fans here want it to be 2nds going back not 14 but I’m in favor of trading back anyway to lower our roster cost obligation going forward and I don’t feel that the drop off is that much.
I don’t understand the inclusion of OKC here at all because I don’t think that Wash should be moving off number 2.
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,689
- And1: 1,364
- Joined: Oct 02, 2005
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
cjmcallist wrote:Feels like an overpay from OKC's perspective.
It's relevant, but I'm also curious - where would Wallace be picked in this draft? He was #10 last year, still 20 years old. Low usage and low volume but shot over 41% from 3, played excellent defense, and was extremely consistent.
Top three this year because of known ability and ceiling.
So yes, it’s an overpay but I also don’t think Wash should move off 2.
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,749
- And1: 774
- Joined: Mar 01, 2006
- Location: Sacramento, CA
-
Re: Washington/OKC/Sacramento
I personally hate it for the Kings. I'm not a fan of Kuzma in the slightest. I wouldn't give up a pick foe him but I'm also not a fan of Kuzmas game. All stats no substance.
Return to Trades and Transactions