RealGM

Pretending there’s no Beal/Butler deal. So it’s two weeks too early for this I know. Just an idea from one of the many Butler threads.

Phoenix: Nurkic, O’Neale, 2025, 2027 firsts
Chicago: Patrick Williams and Jalen Smith

Phoenix - two young good defensive players that fit KD/Booker well and are locked up (cheaply and not so cheap). They still could use another bigs but can match with Allen’s contract or can trust in their new center committee. They keep the 2029 first so can look to move other pieces in a follow up deal.

Chicago - get two firsts. They aren’t very valuable firsts, but neither is what they send out. Anyone who thinks they regret the Patrick signing, they clear all but two years of the deal. They maintain the same roles (backup center and wing) if they are committed to chasing the play-in. Or they flip/rest Vuc and start Nurk and can tank easier. Either way.

i think this is an overpay by Phoenix. Nurkic/1st for PWill seems fine, but Jsmith is not worth o'neale + 1st

Godaddycurse wrote:i think this is an overpay by Phoenix. Nurkic/1st for PWill seems fine, but Jsmith is not worth o'neale + 1st

Agreed.
I like the PWill for Nurk+1st idea.

Godaddycurse wrote:i think this is an overpay by Phoenix. Nurkic/1st for PWill seems fine, but Jsmith is not worth o'neale + 1st

My first question is does Williams make Phoenix better than O'Neale? He is the right fit from a contract/position to match with Nurk, but maybe they should keep O'Neale and use Allen for the center? I guess I don't know how big of a loss Royce is. But in my mind he helps the Suns more than Williams will, is that crazy? But even more they could use having both of them.

Texas Chuck wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:i think this is an overpay by Phoenix. Nurkic/1st for PWill seems fine, but Jsmith is not worth o'neale + 1st

My first question is does Williams make Phoenix better than O'Neale? He is the right fit from a contract/position to match with Nurk, but maybe they should keep O'Neale and use Allen for the center? I guess I don't know how big of a loss Royce is. But in my mind he helps the Suns more than Williams will, is that crazy? But even more they could use having both of them.

ya maybe something like

Allen to Orlando
Jalen Smith/Jevon Carter/POR 2025-2028 LP 1st to Phoenix
Anthony/DEN or ORL 2025 1st to Chicago

I can't really get behind any team paying a 1st for either Williams or Smith.

Bad Nurk money + 1st to get someone who wouldn't necessarily be worth a 1st could be viable, but Williams is bad (worse?) money himself.

Of course Jalen isn’t worth Royce and a first. But these firsts don’t have normal first value… we just saw an actual first get traded for all three of these.. and this is the least valuable two of the three.

jayjaysee wrote:Of course Jalen isn’t worth Royce and a first. But these firsts don’t have normal first value… we just saw an actual first get traded for all three of these.. and this is the least valuable two of the three.

We have more posters than I'd like who dismiss deals by calling firsts with high variance "picks in the mid to late 20s" even though they are 4 years away. But in this case we can pretty comfortably call these low value firsts.

Texas Chuck wrote:

jayjaysee wrote:Of course Jalen isn’t worth Royce and a first. But these firsts don’t have normal first value… we just saw an actual first get traded for all three of these.. and this is the least valuable two of the three.

We have more posters than I'd like who dismiss deals by calling firsts with high variance "picks in the mid to late 20s" even though they are 4 years away. But in this case we can pretty comfortably call these low value firsts.

Sure, but are these guys worth low-value firsts? 3 lower firsts got Pascal Siakam last season (maybe they thought it was 4 w/ Brown), 1 of them got Daniel Gafford as well. I'd just be aiming a bit higher even with lower ones. I must be a lot lower on those guys.

dremill24 wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:

jayjaysee wrote:Of course Jalen isn’t worth Royce and a first. But these firsts don’t have normal first value… we just saw an actual first get traded for all three of these.. and this is the least valuable two of the three.

We have more posters than I'd like who dismiss deals by calling firsts with high variance "picks in the mid to late 20s" even though they are 4 years away. But in this case we can pretty comfortably call these low value firsts.

Sure, but are these guys worth low-value firsts? 3 lower firsts got Pascal Siakam last season (maybe they thought it was 4 w/ Brown), 1 of them got Daniel Gafford as well. I'd just be aiming a bit higher even with lower ones. I must be a lot lower on those guys.

You can read my posts above on what I think of the deal. I'm just acknowledging jay's point about the value of these specific picks.

I think in terms of current talent, the Suns could do better too. The positive to this deal I guess is the guys coming in are young and can be there in a post KD world where they are going to limited avenues to add talent.

jayjaysee wrote:Pretending there’s no Beal/Butler deal. So it’s two weeks too early for this I know. Just an idea from one of the many Butler threads.

Phoenix: Nurkic, O’Neale, 2025, 2027 firsts
Chicago: Patrick Williams and Jalen Smith

Phoenix - two young good defensive players that fit KD/Booker well and are locked up (cheaply and not so cheap). They still could use another bigs but can match with Allen’s contract or can trust in their new center committee. They keep the 2029 first so can look to move other pieces in a follow up deal.

Chicago - get two firsts. They aren’t very valuable firsts, but neither is what they send out. Anyone who thinks they regret the Patrick signing, they clear all but two years of the deal. They maintain the same roles (backup center and wing) if they are committed to chasing the play-in. Or they flip/rest Vuc and start Nurk and can tank easier. Either way.

I think Phoenix should hold on to O'Neale if possible, but Williams is an interesting target.

For the Bulls to do this, they'd better be some value in those 1st's.

Giving up that much youth for that much age is not what the Bulls need. O'Neale is a career bench guy making nearly as much for nearly as long as Williams who for all the criticism of him, he's not washed up or lacking some potential. Taking on Nurkic at double the cost of Smith, as a backup to Vucevic at this point, is a no way. The Bulls have experimented playing Smith with Vucevic, cannot do that with Nurkic. Those picks would have to be within sight of if not in the lottery for the give up this is.

So the Suns get two worse players and pay 2 first round picks for the privilege?

Royce O'Neal is the best player in this trade, signed to the best contract. He's making close to the same money per year as Jalen Smith. There is no reason for the Suns to give up draft capital here.

Nurkic is an expiring contract after this season, with 19 mil left, whereas Patrick Williams just started a 5 year 90 mil contract that the Suns would take on. The latter arguably has a worse contract considering its length.

ChettheJet wrote:For the Bulls to do this, they'd better be some value in those 1st's.

Giving up that much youth for that much age is not what the Bulls need. O'Neale is a career bench guy making nearly as much for nearly as long as Williams who for all the criticism of him, he's not washed up or lacking some potential. Taking on Nurkic at double the cost of Smith, as a backup to Vucevic at this point, is a no way. The Bulls have experimented playing Smith with Vucevic, cannot do that with Nurkic. Those picks would have to be within sight of if not in the lottery for the give up this is.

Royce has started most of his career, so that is factually incorrect. He is also simply better than Williams ever has been and likely ever will be.

babyjax13 wrote:

ChettheJet wrote:For the Bulls to do this, they'd better be some value in those 1st's.

Giving up that much youth for that much age is not what the Bulls need. O'Neale is a career bench guy making nearly as much for nearly as long as Williams who for all the criticism of him, he's not washed up or lacking some potential. Taking on Nurkic at double the cost of Smith, as a backup to Vucevic at this point, is a no way. The Bulls have experimented playing Smith with Vucevic, cannot do that with Nurkic. Those picks would have to be within sight of if not in the lottery for the give up this is.

Royce has started most of his career, so that is factually incorrect. He is also simply better than Williams ever has been and likely ever will be.

Not too mention the claim that Royce O'Neal is making nearly as much for nearly as long is factually inaccurate.

- O'Neal signed for 42 mil 4 years this off-season.
- Patrick Williams signed for 90 mil 5 years this off season.

O'Neal is a better player, on a better contract.

I think bulls would swap Williams for nurkic just to get off salary. no picks…. Tough contract for someone playing like a 7th/8th man

Godaddycurse wrote:i think this is an overpay by Phoenix. Nurkic/1st for PWill seems fine, but Jsmith is not worth o'neale + 1st

I mean is Nurk/1st for Pat a good deal? Suns take on $50M+ for a guy who hasn’t exactly played good basketball. I would hope there is something better out there.

Mr Puddles wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

ChettheJet wrote:For the Bulls to do this, they'd better be some value in those 1st's.

Giving up that much youth for that much age is not what the Bulls need. O'Neale is a career bench guy making nearly as much for nearly as long as Williams who for all the criticism of him, he's not washed up or lacking some potential. Taking on Nurkic at double the cost of Smith, as a backup to Vucevic at this point, is a no way. The Bulls have experimented playing Smith with Vucevic, cannot do that with Nurkic. Those picks would have to be within sight of if not in the lottery for the give up this is.

Royce has started most of his career, so that is factually incorrect. He is also simply better than Williams ever has been and likely ever will be.

Not too mention the claim that Royce O'Neal is making nearly as much for nearly as long is factually inaccurate.

- O'Neal signed for 42 mil 4 years this off-season.
- Patrick Williams signed for 90 mil 5 years this off season.

O'Neal is a better player, on a better contract.

There is the age difference. I could imagine Patrick being better in two years, but that takes some things happening to be the case (Royce decline and/or development from Williams).

Huge no from the Suns.

Williams would not start over Dunn, so the Suns trade 2 1st rounders for questionable future bench upgrade (which Williams may (or may not) offer over O'Neal) and take a bad contract?

No way.

I'm not sure at all that the Suns would do this even without the 1st rounders.

babyjax13 wrote:

Mr Puddles wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:Royce has started most of his career, so that is factually incorrect. He is also simply better than Williams ever has been and likely ever will be.

Not too mention the claim that Royce O'Neal is making nearly as much for nearly as long is factually inaccurate.

- O'Neal signed for 42 mil 4 years this off-season.
- Patrick Williams signed for 90 mil 5 years this off season.

O'Neal is a better player, on a better contract.

There is the age difference. I could imagine Patrick being better in two years, but that takes some things happening to be the case (Royce decline and/or development from Williams).

Yes but making nearly as much is quite far from the truth.