RealGM

Any way this could work. Vuc plus the Port 1st for Capela?

I figure, Vuc is better on offense, Capela on D. Overall, Capela has more value, but at least Vuc and Okongwu can play together some

Any possibility of this? Also saves ATL about $2 million this year (not sure if that pushes Chi to the tax)

If Chi could do this and move Lavine for expirings, they would have A TON of cap space next summer, with a core of Ayo, White, Pwill, MatasB, JSmith, Giddy, Phillips-plus hopefully a top 8 pick in the '25 draft. They'd have close to $100 million in cap space to play with

pipfan wrote:
If Chi could do this and move Lavine for expirings, they would have A TON of cap space next summer, with a core of Ayo, White, Pwill, MatasB, JSmith, Giddy, Phillips-plus hopefully a top 8 pick in the '25 draft. They'd have close to $100 million in cap space to play with

Giddey has a 25M caphold so its more like 70M capspace

pipfan wrote:Any way this could work. Vuc plus the Port 1st for Capela?

I figure, Vuc is better on offense, Capela on D. Overall, Capela has more value, but at least Vuc and Okongwu can play together some

Any possibility of this? Also saves ATL about $2 million this year (not sure if that pushes Chi to the tax)

If Chi could do this and move Lavine for expirings, they would have A TON of cap space next summer, with a core of Ayo, White, Pwill, MatasB, JSmith, Giddy, Phillips-plus hopefully a top 8 pick in the '25 draft. They'd have close to $100 million in cap space to play with

I don't think Atlanta would be interested in Vuc's $21 million salary next season with Jalen Johnson's extension on the horizon.
Hawks are luxury tax averse.
Besides, Hawks have a defensive problem that they have addressed in the offseason. This is the opposite.

Great for the Bulls from a Bulls fan but why does ATL take the huge hit on defense while pushing Okongwu to the bench? Johnson figures to play heavy minutes so how much offense do they give up at the other 2 spots to cover for Vuc and Young? And since they have Okongwu, Zeller and Nance why would they take Vuc for the following season and at as much as he makes.

Bulls get Capela to start ahead of Smith for a year then they can see where they stand at the 5. But to think they find deals for Vucevic and then Lavine is way too optimistic

pipfan wrote:Any way this could work. Vuc plus the Port 1st for Capela?

Bad for Atlanta.

Atlanta is still trying to win -- they don't own their picks until 2028 -- and this is a rotation downgrade. The Hawks pretty much require good roll men and good rim protection alongside Trae, and Vucevic provides neither of those. He's also an on-ball scorer down low for a team that really doesn't need one.

Finally, Atlanta has been consistently solid to good on offense and bad on defense during the Trae era. This move would make them significantly worse on defense and marginally better on offense, thereby emphasizing an area in which the Hawks are already good while expanding an existing weakness.
 
A lottery protected future 1st -- one which, to boot, will almost undoubtedly not convey for at least two seasons -- doesn't move the needle anywhere near enough in the opposite direction.

I figure, Vuc is better on offense, Capela on D. Overall, Capela has more value, but at least Vuc and Okongwu can play together some

No team would want to play Vucevic and Okongwu together unless it were truly necessary. That's a recipe for bad spacing.

No, no reason to take the extra year without a decent asset attached. The Portland first isn't enough. If they were expiring at the same time and Atlanta wanted to try something different, sure, but I can't imagine a worse fit next to Trae.

Absolute spitball, but what about something around Hunter/Capela for Lonzo/Vucevic? Fiscally, keeps Atlanta with that expiring, and allows for a change of pace at their center spots with OO and Vucevic in a platoon. Lonzo could be brought along slowly and if he brings anything, it’d be gravy, but he at least expires.

For Chicago, turns Vucevic to an expiring Capela, and provides another younger wing to see if he fits long term?

Scoot McGroot wrote:Absolute spitball, but what about something around Hunter/Capela for Lonzo/Vucevic? Fiscally, keeps Atlanta with that expiring, and allows for a change of pace at their center spots with OO and Vucevic in a platoon. Lonzo could be brought along slowly and if he brings anything, it’d be gravy, but he at least expires.

For Chicago, turns Vucevic to an expiring Capela, and provides another younger wing to see if he fits long term?

Still don't really see it for the Hawks, as they would seem to need Hunter as a significant minutes rotation forward (along with Johnson, the #1 pick (who needs an easier to spell name or a nickname if he's going to be relevant) and a few minutes from Nance).

As Atlanta doesn't control their 1st round picks for the next few years - but Chicago does as long as they're bad enough - an Atlanta/Chicago trade should involve Atlanta getting better in the short-run in exchange for something. I also don't see Vuc as a target for a team with other acceptable center options. At this point he only make sense on teams that would otherwise have a big hole at center (such as Chicago).

Scoot McGroot wrote:Absolute spitball, but what about something around Hunter/Capela for Lonzo/Vucevic? Fiscally, keeps Atlanta with that expiring, and allows for a change of pace at their center spots with OO and Vucevic in a platoon. Lonzo could be brought along slowly and if he brings anything, it’d be gravy, but he at least expires.

For Chicago, turns Vucevic to an expiring Capela, and provides another younger wing to see if he fits long term?

Lonzo's injury history is problematic.
Losing Hunter reduces the depth at SF and the size at forward.
Doesn't make Atlanta better.

Scoot McGroot wrote:Absolute spitball, but what about something around Hunter/Capela for Lonzo/Vucevic?

I'll go against the grain; Atlanta would definitely consider this trade to get out of the third year of Hunter's salary.

Vuc's offense gives them some more flexibility with Okongwu and Nance.

Plus, Trae and Lonzo are friends.

jayu70 wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:Absolute spitball, but what about something around Hunter/Capela for Lonzo/Vucevic? Fiscally, keeps Atlanta with that expiring, and allows for a change of pace at their center spots with OO and Vucevic in a platoon. Lonzo could be brought along slowly and if he brings anything, it’d be gravy, but he at least expires.

For Chicago, turns Vucevic to an expiring Capela, and provides another younger wing to see if he fits long term?

Lonzo's injury history is problematic.
Losing Hunter reduces the depth at SF and the size at forward.
Doesn't make Atlanta better.

Don’t necessarily disagree lonzo’s injury history is problematic, but he’s expiring. If he provides anything on the court, it’s gravy. If he does heal up, he could be a cheaper version of what they hoped for with Murray, in a bigger defender to pair with Trae that can also handle the ball and take some stress off Trae at times. And if there wasn’t an injury history there, Atlanta would owe a good amount of value.

As for Hunter, it’s more about clearing his contract. He’s had a couple coaches there now, and he’s just not fitting with any of them. It seems like if he puts it together, it might not be in Atlanta?

To me, it’s more that Vucevic could offer something Atlanta hasn’t had in awhile as a counter to Okongwu.

It’s not pretty. And it’s kind of a wild spitball, like I said. Just feels like Atlanta needs a change up, but without adding a ton of salary.

Scoot McGroot wrote:Absolute spitball, but what about something around Hunter/Capela for Lonzo/Vucevic? Fiscally, keeps Atlanta with that expiring, and allows for a change of pace at their center spots with OO and Vucevic in a platoon. Lonzo could be brought along slowly and if he brings anything, it’d be gravy, but he at least expires.

For Chicago, turns Vucevic to an expiring Capela, and provides another younger wing to see if he fits long term?

I'd say it's even worse for Atlanta than the initial idea. Hunter was a solid starter last season. Capela provides more value to the Hawks than Vucevic would. Lonzo will probably never play again. The Hawks owe a 1st to the Spurs in 2025 and 2027 and a swap in 2026; they have zero incentive to get worse at this point, and that's what this trade would do. They'd gain about $20 million in cap space next season, but that doesn't buy much these days, and the Hawks would have very little flexibility after Johnson's extension in any case -- and what little they could have would depend upon them renouncing every other free agent.

Don’t necessarily disagree lonzo’s injury history is problematic, but he’s expiring. If he provides anything on the court, it’s gravy. If he does heal up, he could be a cheaper version of what they hoped for with Murray, in a bigger defender to pair with Trae that can also handle the ball and take some stress off Trae at times. And if there wasn’t an injury history there, Atlanta would owe a good amount of value.

"If he can heal up" is a pure hypothetical, and an unlikely one. It's very unusual for a player to come back from so severe an injury, and Lonzo in particular cannot lose a step or two and still be a viable NBA player.

As for Hunter, it’s more about clearing his contract. He’s had a couple coaches there now, and he’s just not fitting with any of them. It seems like if he puts it together, it might not be in Atlanta?

He was solid last season.

To me, it’s more that Vucevic could offer something Atlanta hasn’t had in awhile as a counter to Okongwu.

Atlanta's problems in the Trae era have always been on defense. They've been just fine on offense. Replacing Capela with Vucevic would mean a downgrade on defense for a probably marginal upgrade on offense; Vucevic is not very good anymore as a scorer, he'd have a weird fit into that system, and he'd be a downgrade next to Trae as a roll man.

Vucevic is nearly 34, is in decline, has lost a step, is now pretty bad on defense (after being merely below average for most of his career), can't shoot threes, is relatively weak on the roll, and has been pretty poor overall on offense in two of his past three seasons, seasons in which he was a minus-value player as a result. At his age, his value is very unlikely to rebound to what it was three seasons ago.

Crymson wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:Absolute spitball, but what about something around Hunter/Capela for Lonzo/Vucevic? Fiscally, keeps Atlanta with that expiring, and allows for a change of pace at their center spots with OO and Vucevic in a platoon. Lonzo could be brought along slowly and if he brings anything, it’d be gravy, but he at least expires.

For Chicago, turns Vucevic to an expiring Capela, and provides another younger wing to see if he fits long term?

Even worse for Atlanta. Hunter was a pretty good player last season. Capela provides more value to the Hawks than Vucevic would. Lonzo will probably never play again. The Hawks owe a 1st to the Spurs in 2025 and 2027 and a swap in 2026. They have zero incentive to get worse at this point.

I believe Lonzo’s been cleared for camp? He’s playing 5 on 5 in practice right now, finally. I assume he’ll need his minutes managed HEAVILY this year, though.

THe rest is mostly keeping Atlanta about as good as they are currently, while allowing OO, JJ, and DD room to grow there, with some developmental role for Risacher. Hunter is fine there, but he just hasn’t been terribly good for them either. Vucevic at least allows a chance for some offense at the 5 spot off the bench while maintaining the rebounding, and spreading the lane a bit more. I genuinely don’t think that this idea makes Atlanta much, if any, worse on the court, while it allows the young guys to continue to grow in their roles.

babyjax13 wrote:No, no reason to take the extra year without a decent asset attached. The Portland first isn't enough. If they were expiring at the same time and Atlanta wanted to try something different, sure, but I can't imagine a worse fit next to Trae.

It's not just about the extra year. The Hawks would get worse by doing this, and a lottery-protected 1st isn't enough to compensate for that.

raleigh wrote:I'll go against the grain; Atlanta would definitely consider this trade to get out of the third year of Hunter's salary.

Why? He was a solid starter last season, and they're going to have little cap space next summer after Johnson's extension anyway.

Vuc's offense gives them some more flexibility with Okongwu and Nance.

Defense, not offense, is Atlanta's problem. Vucevic is now a bad defender and is no longer even anything special on offense, and he's unlikely to rebound at 34.

Plus, Trae and Lonzo are friends.

The power of friendship isn't likely to be a factor in the Hawks both downgrading in talent and paying $21 million to a guy who's unlikely to be an NBA-caliber player again.

Scoot McGroot wrote:I believe Lonzo’s been cleared for camp? He’s playing 5 on 5 in practice right now, finally. I assume he’ll need his minutes managed HEAVILY this year, though.

He was cleared to play five-on-five, yes. Does this mean that he's recovered enough to provide value in the NBA at all, let alone at his previous level? No. And margins in the world's most competitive basketball league are razor thin, and Lonzo wasn't very quick to begin with.

THe rest is mostly keeping Atlanta about as good as they are currently

Swapping Capela and Hunter for Vucevic and Lonzo is almost certain to make the Hawks worse. Even just Capela for Vucevic would make them worse.

while allowing OO, JJ, and DD room to grow there, with some developmental role for Risacher.

Johnson is going to see a huge role no matter what, just as he did last season. Okongwu doesn't need more minutes; mid-twenties is ideal for the average traditional big. Bogdan will be moving primarily into shooting guard minutes with Murray gone, and Daniels -- who remains an NBA maybe -- and Risacher will step into the forward minutes vacated by that and by the departure of Bey.

Hunter is fine there, but he just hasn’t been terribly good for them either.

Hunter averaged close to 16 PPG last season on nearly 60% true shooting, including 38.5% from three, and played decent defense. That's a very solid starter.

Vucevic at least allows a chance for some offense at the 5 spot off the bench while maintaining the rebounding, and spreading the lane a bit more.

The Hawks don't need more offense from their centers. They're fine on offense altogether. They need their centers to be strong roll men next to Trae and to provide solid defense. Vucevic does neither. Again, this makes the Hawks stronger in an area of strength -- though probably not significantly so -- and considerably weaker in an area of weakness. And Vucevic, at 34, is likely to see further decline in the near future.

Vucevic doesn't really spread the floor. He's been a reliable perimeter shooter only twice in his career, and even his reputation as a good midrange shooter is undeserved (not that midrange spacing is any replacement for perimeter spacing). And Trae, who lives in the pick-and-roll and doesn't score much at the rim, benefits a great deal from having strong roll men alongside him.

Scoot McGroot wrote:

jayu70 wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:Absolute spitball, but what about something around Hunter/Capela for Lonzo/Vucevic? Fiscally, keeps Atlanta with that expiring, and allows for a change of pace at their center spots with OO and Vucevic in a platoon. Lonzo could be brought along slowly and if he brings anything, it’d be gravy, but he at least expires.

For Chicago, turns Vucevic to an expiring Capela, and provides another younger wing to see if he fits long term?

Lonzo's injury history is problematic.
Losing Hunter reduces the depth at SF and the size at forward.
Doesn't make Atlanta better.

Don’t necessarily disagree lonzo’s injury history is problematic, but he’s expiring. If he provides anything on the court, it’s gravy. If he does heal up, he could be a cheaper version of what they hoped for with Murray, in a bigger defender to pair with Trae that can also handle the ball and take some stress off Trae at times. And if there wasn’t an injury history there, Atlanta would owe a good amount of value.

As for Hunter, it’s more about clearing his contract. He’s had a couple coaches there now, and he’s just not fitting with any of them. It seems like if he puts it together, it might not be in Atlanta?

To me, it’s more that Vucevic could offer something Atlanta hasn’t had in awhile as a counter to Okongwu.

It’s not pretty. And it’s kind of a wild spitball, like I said. Just feels like Atlanta needs a change up, but without adding a ton of salary.

Hawks want to win. Banking on a healthy Lonzo is fools gold.
Again, Offense is not the Hawks' problem, so Vuc for Capela isn't the right direction.
Hunter actually played well off the bench last season under Quin once he returned from injury.
The change up Atlanta needs is to just start Okongwu and have Capela off the bench.

Crymson wrote:Why? He was a solid starter last season, and they're going to have little cap space next summer after Johnson's extension anyway.

Hunter is perhaps the most average player in the NBA. Nothing too special, nothing too negative. I have zero doubts that the Hawks would move him for a shorter contract if they could.

And they won't have any cap space if and when they extend Jalen.

jayu70 wrote:Hawks want to win.

They don't have an incentive to be terrible, but that's not the same thing as wanting to win.

raleigh wrote:

jayu70 wrote:Hawks want to win.

They don't have an incentive to be terrible, but that's not the same thing as wanting to win.

What's the distinction you're drawing here? Sure, they're unlikely to be making win-now trades. But if they don't stand to benefit at all from losing more, then they're not going to do things that make them lose more unless there's a point to doing so.

Crymson wrote:they're not going to do things that make them lose more unless there's a point to doing so.

I've addressed this already. If the Hawks could get out of the final year of Hunter's contract without making the team noticeably worse, I believe they would do so.

The disagreement is over how much of an impact he makes on winning. I personally believe it's marginal.