RealGM

Trade 1

Dallas out: PJ Washington, Daniel Gafford, Caleb Martin, Lakers 2029 first
Atl out: Trae Young

Why for Dallas: get a PG to run the show until Irving gets healthy
Why for Hawks: feels like the right time to move on from Young after the most recent playoff ending. Gafford and Washington give them back some on court value next year and the pick provides long term value

Trade 2

Dallas out: Klay Thompson, Naji Marshal, Dereck Lively, Whatever 1st round pick they have left that they can trade
Wolves out: Gobert

Why for Dallas: get vet rim protection
Why for Wolves: Lively replaces Gobert and Thompson provides extra shooting, the pick adds some long term value

Fire away!

Pretty sure none of this is CBA legal for Dallas.

Also that's not close to a fair offer for Trae.

That's a high valuation for 33 y/o Gobert....

Wolves would be stupid not to take that deal. Lively is worth more than Rudy right?

GoBobs wrote:Trade 1

Dallas out: PJ Washington, Daniel Gafford, Caleb Martin, Lakers 2029 first
Atl out: Trae Young

Why for Dallas: get a PG to run the show until Irving gets healthy
Why for Hawks: feels like the right time to move on from Young after the most recent playoff ending. Gafford and Washington give them back some on court value next year and the pick provides long term value

The Trae Young disrespect is crazy. "Moving on" is different than "giving away."

I don't see the offer as insulting for Trae, very close to real value.

Mavs underpay for Trae and overpay for Gobert here in my opinion. Switch Lively and Gafford and add some draft compensation in deal 1 (although I don't know if the Mavs have two picks to trade, one in both deals in addition to the Lakers pick) and this is closer to real value.

It's still complete insanity that the Mavs didn't even get the 2nd Lakers pick in the Luka deal.

Mavrelous wrote:I don't see the offer as insulting for Trae, very close to real value.

It’s very insulting and hawks would never entertain it.

Atlanta isn't trading Trae for a couple low-end starters on expiring contracts and a 1st in 4 years.

Some team should/would price Trae out of Dallas’ budget imo.

The other deal.. I love Rudy and could see Dallas entertaining Lively for Rudy. And could see Minnesota dumping Klay and getting to reset their spending with Lively’s cheap contract. But there should not be an additional first. And still feels like a good trade for Minnesota, not sure what the final deal looks like.

Trae has been inefficient from the field his entire career, and league average as a scorer in general, and ATL has been trying to build a team around him unsuccessfully for 7 years due to his defensive limitations, to top it all off, he's expiring.
PJ Washington isn't low end starter, he was the starting PF on a finals team and key part of that team, Gafford is indeed low end starter.

I don't think ATL should do the deal:
They don't own their picks and can't afford to just create a gaping hole at PG.
PJ plays a position they are saturated at.
I do think the deal is short one asset

but I'd love to know what the right package for Trae at his contract status that makes this such a huge underpay.

jayjaysee wrote:The other deal.. I love Rudy and could see Dallas entertaining Lively for Rudy. And could see Minnesota dumping Klay and getting to reset their spending with Lively’s cheap contract. But there should not be an additional first. And still feels like a good trade for Minnesota, not sure what the final deal looks like.

I agree with this, and I don’t know what MIN’s new owners will do about finances.

I wonder if this deal is a year premature though? MIN may want to run it back after consecutive WCF appearances, and DAL without Kyrie might struggle in the tough West. However, I do think a Kyrie-Gobert pick-and-roll would be a beautiful thing to watch in 2026-27. Price might be better for DAL as well.

shrink wrote:

jayjaysee wrote:The other deal.. I love Rudy and could see Dallas entertaining Lively for Rudy. And could see Minnesota dumping Klay and getting to reset their spending with Lively’s cheap contract. But there should not be an additional first. And still feels like a good trade for Minnesota, not sure what the final deal looks like.

I agree with this, and I don’t know what MIN’s new owners will do about finances.

I wonder if this deal is a year premature though? MIN may want to run it back after consecutive WCF appearances, and DAL without Kyrie might struggle in the tough West. However, I do think a Kyrie-Gobert pick-and-roll would be a beautiful thing to watch in 2026-27. Price might be better for DAL as well.

Not to mention a Flagg/Anthony Davis/Gobert defensive front line

Ball4life32 wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:I don't see the offer as insulting for Trae, very close to real value.

It’s very insulting and hawks would never entertain it.

Neutral fan here, not only is it insulting but doesnt help the Hawks at all. Honestly makes no sense for them.

shrink wrote:

jayjaysee wrote:The other deal.. I love Rudy and could see Dallas entertaining Lively for Rudy. And could see Minnesota dumping Klay and getting to reset their spending with Lively’s cheap contract. But there should not be an additional first. And still feels like a good trade for Minnesota, not sure what the final deal looks like.

I agree with this, and I don’t know what MIN’s new owners will do about finances.

I wonder if this deal is a year premature though? MIN may want to run it back after consecutive WCF appearances, and DAL without Kyrie might struggle in the tough West. However, I do think a Kyrie-Gobert pick-and-roll would be a beautiful thing to watch in 2026-27. Price might be better for DAL as well.

If Minnesota is willing to spend two years over the second apron, I would be happy for the fans. I think that’s going to be rare though.

If you wait to see another offseason to look at Rudy for Lively.. I think there’s a really small window where it still makes sense?

Either Lively builds off his rookie play and you want to lock up the young elite role player and not get older..or he continues to miss games and doesn’t push to be a steady 28-30mpg and Minnesota shouldn’t look to get worse just to get younger..

Mavrelous wrote:Trae has been inefficient from the field his entire career, and league average as a scorer in general, and ATL has been trying to build a team around him unsuccessfully for 7 years due to his defensive limitations, to top it all off, he's expiring.
PJ Washington isn't low end starter, he was the starting PF on a finals team and key part of that team, Gafford is indeed low end starter.

I don't think ATL should do the deal:
They don't own their picks and can't afford to just create a gaping hole at PG.
PJ plays a position they are saturated at.
I do think the deal is short one asset

but I'd love to know what the right package for Trae at his contract status that makes this such a huge underpay.

I don't have the makeup for a Trae Young deal at the moment, but PJ Washington is barely moving the needle(if he is even moving it at all). Would have came out better selling us on Gafford because he at least is more useful. PJ Washington started because he had to. He really belongs on the bench and is likely to be included as salary filler. We would probably need another 2-3 FRP's to even consider the deal.

Geaux_Hawks wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:Trae has been inefficient from the field his entire career, and league average as a scorer in general, and ATL has been trying to build a team around him unsuccessfully for 7 years due to his defensive limitations, to top it all off, he's expiring.
PJ Washington isn't low end starter, he was the starting PF on a finals team and key part of that team, Gafford is indeed low end starter.

I don't think ATL should do the deal:
They don't own their picks and can't afford to just create a gaping hole at PG.
PJ plays a position they are saturated at.
I do think the deal is short one asset

but I'd love to know what the right package for Trae at his contract status that makes this such a huge underpay.

I don't have the makeup for a Trae Young deal at the moment, but PJ Washington is barely moving the needle(if he is even moving it at all). Would have came out better selling us on Gafford because he at least is more useful. PJ Washington started because he had to. He really belongs on the bench and is likely to be included as salary filler. We would probably need another 2-3 FRP's to even consider the deal.

You can ask for 2-3 more 1sts, but you won't get IMO...
I only watched every Mavs game with PJ, many of them only once, some twice, he was a key player in making that team a finals worthy team and is the perfect role player to fill the modern 4, and he's a significantly better and more useful player than Gafford.
Now, I would never sell him to the Hawks because they have 2 players at his position, but he's not a salary filler, my point wasn't that the Hawks should take that deal, but that the value in the deal isn't far off Trae Young value.

I mean one can question Trae Young the player and what a team's ceiling looks like with him as your best player(though Dallas wouldn't be asking that of him here), but I don't think we should actually expect Atlanta to trade him for a package of two good, but not great role players on expiring deals and one first round pick in 4 years.

Just isn't something they would ever entertain imo.

Geaux_Hawks wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:Trae has been inefficient from the field his entire career, and league average as a scorer in general, and ATL has been trying to build a team around him unsuccessfully for 7 years due to his defensive limitations, to top it all off, he's expiring.
PJ Washington isn't low end starter, he was the starting PF on a finals team and key part of that team, Gafford is indeed low end starter.

I don't think ATL should do the deal:
They don't own their picks and can't afford to just create a gaping hole at PG.
PJ plays a position they are saturated at.
I do think the deal is short one asset

but I'd love to know what the right package for Trae at his contract status that makes this such a huge underpay.

I don't have the makeup for a Trae Young deal at the moment, but PJ Washington is barely moving the needle(if he is even moving it at all). Would have came out better selling us on Gafford because he at least is more useful. PJ Washington started because he had to. He really belongs on the bench and is likely to be included as salary filler. We would probably need another 2-3 FRP's to even consider the deal.

Uhm wat? I agree that Atlanta shouldn't even entertain this deal but I guess you didn't watch a single Mavs game in the last 18 months if that is what you think about PJ.

Hawks would lose their franchise if they did this trade. Bad value, no matter what you think of Trae... then you add the fact that they dont own their picks... Hawks add 3 bench players and a pick 4 years in the future for their star player...