RealGM

Borrowing jayjaysees idea

jayjaysee wrote:
The one twist I could try would be if you build a three team deal around Maxi/Gafford for Williams/useful backup center. Maybe Dallas doesn’t want to trade their first or move on from Grimes hopefully..

Phoenix trade: Nurkic, 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)
Phoenix receive: Gafford, Exum

Dallas trade: Exum, Gafford, Kleber
Dallas receive: Williams, Smith

Chicago trade: Smith, Williams
Chicago receive: Nurkic, Kleber, PHX 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)

Why for Chicago: get a future 1st by eating bad salaries/taking on the worst players
Why for Dallas: upgrade forward position in exchange for downgrading backup C, give more minutes to lively. Improve their spacing
Why for phoenix: add a starting caliber C

Just don’t think Gafford and Exum are worth the draft capital from a Suns perspective. They got to make a bigger change and can’t use the last of their draft capital on that. But, I do like the fit generally.

Suns shouldn't do this, if you find yourseld in hole, stop digging...
For Dallas, value and fit is fine, I wouldn't pull the trigger for chemistry reasons.

Gafford isn’t worth that first IMO.

Dallas should just cut out Chicago if Phoenix does their deal. Dump Powell on a different third team. Understanding the timing of trading for Nurk is funny but still..

Dallas shouldn't touch this.

Williams is as injury prone as Dallas' key players, too risky adding yet another one. I don't agree with those that think this is bad for the Suns. What's the likelihood that pic even conveys? So for two 2nds they dump the worst starting center in the association and fill two big positions of need?

daoneandonly wrote:Dallas shouldn't touch this.

Williams is as injury prone as Dallas' key players, too risky adding yet another one. I don't agree with those that think this is bad for the Suns. What's the likelihood that pic even conveys? So for two 2nds they dump the worst starting center in the association and fill two big positions of need?

That pick has a 48% chance of conveying even if Phoenix has the worst record in the league?

daoneandonly wrote:Dallas shouldn't touch this.

Williams is as injury prone as Dallas' key players, too risky adding yet another one. I don't agree with those that think this is bad for the Suns. What's the likelihood that pic even conveys? So for two 2nds they dump the worst starting center in the association and fill two big positions of need?

93.06%

Gafford cannot pull that pick, he himself is a low end starter as well. I rather have him than Nurk on most teams but there is a reason Dallas got him for the pick that they did and his value likely hasn't changed a lot sense then. This isn't a knock on Gafford just a reality of how the NBA values centers like him.

kind of feel like people are overvaluing the 2031 1st here. Denver traded a far off top 5 protected 1st for a very late 1st and 2nd(s) not too long ago.

Godaddycurse wrote:kind of feel like people are overvaluing the 2031 1st here. Denver traded a far off top 5 protected 1st for a very late 1st and 2nd(s) not too long ago.

Denver didn't have the 1st to trade, they were able to becaue the team holding the 27 1st was the one trading for the 29 1st.
Suns are out of control of picks until 2030, and even the swaps are swapped multiple times, when they fall, they will have very hard time getting up.

The sound you hear is the Bulls hanging up. Who is that new VP and GM in 2031 who gave up two younger pieces of their core group for two older guys they have no use for. If you want to help your teams then do it but don't involve teams to play the fool and help you out.

psman2 wrote:

daoneandonly wrote:Dallas shouldn't touch this.

Williams is as injury prone as Dallas' key players, too risky adding yet another one. I don't agree with those that think this is bad for the Suns. What's the likelihood that pic even conveys? So for two 2nds they dump the worst starting center in the association and fill two big positions of need?

93.06%

Gafford cannot pull that pick, he himself is a low end starter as well. I rather have him than Nurk on most teams but there is a reason Dallas got him for the pick that they did and his value likely hasn't changed a lot sense then. This isn't a knock on Gafford just a reality of how the NBA values centers like him.

jayjaysee wrote:

daoneandonly wrote:Dallas shouldn't touch this.

Williams is as injury prone as Dallas' key players, too risky adding yet another one. I don't agree with those that think this is bad for the Suns. What's the likelihood that pic even conveys? So for two 2nds they dump the worst starting center in the association and fill two big positions of need?

That pick has a 48% chance of conveying even if Phoenix has the worst record in the league?

Yea I misread it. Still wouldn't do this for Dallas. No reason to help PHX and target an often injured Williams while downgrading the 5 spot. Lively has shown he can't consistently stay healthy

Godaddycurse wrote:Borrowing jayjaysees idea

jayjaysee wrote:
The one twist I could try would be if you build a three team deal around Maxi/Gafford for Williams/useful backup center. Maybe Dallas doesn’t want to trade their first or move on from Grimes hopefully..

Phoenix trade: Nurkic, 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)
Phoenix receive: Gafford, Exum

Dallas trade: Exum, Gafford, Kleber
Dallas receive: Williams, Smith

Chicago trade: Smith, Williams
Chicago receive: Nurkic, Kleber, PHX 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)

Why for Chicago: get a future 1st by eating bad salaries/taking on the worst players
Why for Dallas: upgrade forward position in exchange for downgrading backup C, give more minutes to lively. Improve their spacing
Why for phoenix: add a starting caliber C

Gafford/Maxi/25 1st for Poeltl/Agbaji?

I feel like Chicago should be cut out. Nurkic is a perfectly adequate backup who would be a chance of pace from Lively and the first would be a nice asset for a team that regularly uses picks to upgrade their roster.

Mavrelous wrote:Suns shouldn't do this, if you find yourseld in hole, stop digging...
For Dallas, value and fit is fine, I wouldn't pull the trigger for chemistry reasons.

I actually disagree about Phoenix. They have the talent to be a really good team, but the ancillary pieces are missing. Gafford seems really nice for what they need and I think they should push in. You don't win championships by watching your core age out. If they don't win in Durant's window, they'll be able to trade Booker for a king's ransom and still rebuild pretty effectively. I can see thinking that Gafford isn't the right guy to do this for, but I don't hate the general idea of using that pick to fix the depth issues.

babyjax13 wrote:I feel like Chicago should be cut out. Nurkic is a perfectly adequate backup who would be a chance of pace from Lively and the first would be a nice asset for a team that regularly uses picks to upgrade their roster.

Mavrelous wrote:Suns shouldn't do this, if you find yourseld in hole, stop digging...
For Dallas, value and fit is fine, I wouldn't pull the trigger for chemistry reasons.

I actually disagree about Phoenix. They have the talent to be a really good team, but the ancillary pieces are missing. Gafford seems really nice for what they need and I think they should push in. You don't win championships by watching your core age out. If they don't win in Durant's window, they'll be able to trade Booker for a king's ransom and still rebuild pretty effectively. I can see thinking that Gafford isn't the right guy to do this for, but I don't hate the general idea of using that pick to fix the depth issues.

Gafford is backup on a contender, not a starter, against good teams that know how to pull the big out of the paint, his inferiority vs someine like Lively jumps out.
They don't have the ancillary pieces and they have invested 80M on them.
I have hard time seeing them recovering, they are better off admitting failure and selling, they should be looking at recovering what they can from their draft capital.

Mavrelous wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:Borrowing jayjaysees idea

jayjaysee wrote:
The one twist I could try would be if you build a three team deal around Maxi/Gafford for Williams/useful backup center. Maybe Dallas doesn’t want to trade their first or move on from Grimes hopefully..

Phoenix trade: Nurkic, 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)
Phoenix receive: Gafford, Exum

Dallas trade: Exum, Gafford, Kleber
Dallas receive: Williams, Smith

Chicago trade: Smith, Williams
Chicago receive: Nurkic, Kleber, PHX 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)

Why for Chicago: get a future 1st by eating bad salaries/taking on the worst players
Why for Dallas: upgrade forward position in exchange for downgrading backup C, give more minutes to lively. Improve their spacing
Why for phoenix: add a starting caliber C

Gafford/Maxi/25 1st for Poeltl/Agbaji?

No.

Agbaji > 25 DAL 1st
poeltl > gafford + kleber

Godaddycurse wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:Borrowing jayjaysees idea



Phoenix trade: Nurkic, 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)
Phoenix receive: Gafford, Exum

Dallas trade: Exum, Gafford, Kleber
Dallas receive: Williams, Smith

Chicago trade: Smith, Williams
Chicago receive: Nurkic, Kleber, PHX 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)

Why for Chicago: get a future 1st by eating bad salaries/taking on the worst players
Why for Dallas: upgrade forward position in exchange for downgrading backup C, give more minutes to lively. Improve their spacing
Why for phoenix: add a starting caliber C

Gafford/Maxi/25 1st for Poeltl/Agbaji?

No.

Agbaji > 25 DAL 1st
poeltl > gafford + kleber

0 chance Agbaji has 1st pick value, I added him as a filler to balance roster spots...

Mavrelous wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:Gafford/Maxi/25 1st for Poeltl/Agbaji?

No.

Agbaji > 25 DAL 1st
poeltl > gafford + kleber

0 chance Agbaji had 1st pick value, I added him as a filler to balance roster spots...

Agbaji is playing well as a low usage 3/D wing shooting 50/40 and has another cheap year left. He has a great chance of fetching a non lotto 1st

Godaddycurse wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:Borrowing jayjaysees idea



Phoenix trade: Nurkic, 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)
Phoenix receive: Gafford, Exum

Dallas trade: Exum, Gafford, Kleber
Dallas receive: Williams, Smith

Chicago trade: Smith, Williams
Chicago receive: Nurkic, Kleber, PHX 2031 top 4 protected 1st (becomes DEN + PHO 2031 2nds if not conveyed)

Why for Chicago: get a future 1st by eating bad salaries/taking on the worst players
Why for Dallas: upgrade forward position in exchange for downgrading backup C, give more minutes to lively. Improve their spacing
Why for phoenix: add a starting caliber C

Gafford/Maxi/25 1st for Poeltl/Agbaji?

No.

Agbaji > 25 DAL 1st
poeltl > gafford + kleber

Neither of those are true. Agbaji is JAG at best. Gafford on his contract is better value than Poetl, one overpaid year of Maxi doesn't move that needle

Godaddycurse wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:
No.

Agbaji > 25 DAL 1st
poeltl > gafford + kleber

0 chance Agbaji had 1st pick value, I added him as a filler to balance roster spots...

Agbaji is playing well as a low usage 3/D wing shooting 50/40 and has another cheap year left.

Then remove him...
Gafford/Maxi/1st for Poeltl

Mavrelous wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:0 chance Agbaji had 1st pick value, I added him as a filler to balance roster spots...

Agbaji is playing well as a low usage 3/D wing shooting 50/40 and has another cheap year left.

Then remove him...
Gafford/Maxi/1st for Poeltl

Why would you give up a first for this Khalil? I know Gaff hasn't had a great season, but this seems a bit knee jerk reactionary, no? Poeltl didn't have FRP value when Tor traded for him, let alone now