RealGM

Draft Night Trade

Lakers get: 19th pick and 26th pick

Nets get: 55th pick and 2031 1st round pick (unprotected)

Why for Lakers?

If there are players they like in this range, I could see them doing it. Luka just turned 26 years old, and Lebron is on the way out, so maybe they don't hate rookies anymore?

Why for Nets?

They currently have I think #8, #19, #26, #27, and #36. I think maybe they try to move up, but if unsuccessful, a consolidation trade could be a good option for them. The unprotected 2031 Lakers 1st might actually end up being pretty good. They also get the #55 pick.

Based on history, the inclusion of #26 is overkill. You never see 2 current picks traded for 1 future pick.

TheNetsFan wrote:Based on history, the inclusion of #26 is overkill. You never see 2 current picks traded for 1 future pick.

What history? Nuggets got their picks for top 5 protected, this is unprotected.
Lakers shouldn't do this, Nets should jump on this.

TheNetsFan wrote:Based on history, the inclusion of #26 is overkill. You never see 2 current picks traded for 1 future pick.

Fair enough. Revise it to #19 and #36 for 2031 1st (top-4 protected) and #55.

Mavrelous wrote:

TheNetsFan wrote:Based on history, the inclusion of #26 is overkill. You never see 2 current picks traded for 1 future pick.

What history? Nuggets got their picks for top 5 protected, this is unprotected.
Lakers shouldn't do this, Nets should jump on this.

Yeah exactly.

Suns just got 3 FRPs for one unprotected 31 FRP

So the original trade was basically fair.

So the original trade was basically fair. Maybe i should have put protections on it.

zimpy27 wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:

TheNetsFan wrote:Based on history, the inclusion of #26 is overkill. You never see 2 current picks traded for 1 future pick.

What history? Nuggets got their picks for top 5 protected, this is unprotected.
Lakers shouldn't do this, Nets should jump on this.

Yeah exactly.

Suns just got 3 FRPs for one unprotected 31 FRP

3 worst of picks from multiple contenders that likely never approach #19.

I presume with the Nuggets pick, you're referring to when they got Strawther? The ended up being a net of #29 and a 2nd for a future 1st.

If LAL wants to get into 1st rd they will have some options. OKC, WAS, ATL, ORL could be options.

TheNetsFan wrote:

zimpy27 wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:What history? Nuggets got their picks for top 5 protected, this is unprotected.
Lakers shouldn't do this, Nets should jump on this.

Yeah exactly.

Suns just got 3 FRPs for one unprotected 31 FRP

3 worst of picks from multiple contenders that likely never approach #19.

I presume with the Nuggets pick, you're referring to when they got Strawther? The ended up being a net of #29 and a 2nd for a future 1st.

There were 2 trades
Jamychael Green dump + 27 top 5 protected 1st for 30th and 2 future 2nds
And the Strawther deal.
Also, in the Strawther case Nuggets didn't have the 1st, OKC needed to change the language on the previous pick.

TheNetsFan wrote:

zimpy27 wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:What history? Nuggets got their picks for top 5 protected, this is unprotected.
Lakers shouldn't do this, Nets should jump on this.

Yeah exactly.

Suns just got 3 FRPs for one unprotected 31 FRP

3 worst of picks from multiple contenders that likely never approach #19.

I presume with the Nuggets pick, you're referring to when they got Strawther? The ended up being a net of #29 and a 2nd for a future 1st.

You don't think least favourable of Minny or Cavs can't be close to pick 19 in 2027 or 2029?

I think this works better with Claxton included. Claxton+27 for Maxi/Vandervilt+Lakers31...I'm not sure if the LAKERS should include Knecht (value) or Milton (salary match).

zimpy27 wrote:

TheNetsFan wrote:

zimpy27 wrote:

Yeah exactly.

Suns just got 3 FRPs for one unprotected 31 FRP

3 worst of picks from multiple contenders that likely never approach #19.

I presume with the Nuggets pick, you're referring to when they got Strawther? The ended up being a net of #29 and a 2nd for a future 1st.

You don't think least favourable of Minny or Cavs can't be close to pick 19 in 2027 or 2029?

No. Both teams have young players that will likely br top 5 or 10 players by then, if not there already.

Another example of future picks for now picks is Minny trading an unprotected '31 and a top 1 protected '30 swap for #8.

Market value is more along the lines of just #19 or #26+#27 for a future unprotected pick (or a very lightly protected one that rolls over for multiple shots to convey), especially in what is considered a very strong, deep draft.

Astaluego wrote:I think this works better with Claxton included. Claxton+27 for Maxi/Vandervilt+Lakers31...I'm not sure if the LAKERS should include Knecht (value) or Milton (salary match).

Close, but I think the Nets would insist on expiring filler instead of Vanderbilt.

Astaluego wrote:I think this works better with Claxton included. Claxton+27 for Maxi/Vandervilt+Lakers31...I'm not sure if the LAKERS should include Knecht (value) or Milton (salary match).

They need to add salary, but Milton should be enough.

Nets would not be the team turning this down. They don't need all these picks and to get an unprotected 1st back for low level 1sts? What are we even doing here?

TheNetsFan wrote:

Astaluego wrote:I think this works better with Claxton included. Claxton+27 for Maxi/Vandervilt+Lakers31...I'm not sure if the LAKERS should include Knecht (value) or Milton (salary match).

Close, but I think the Nets would insist on expiring filler instead of Vanderbilt.

Vandervilt only has a couple more seasons left, is paid below the MLE, and is still a 26-year-old defensive ace. I thought they wouldn't mind his salary, but maybe the Wizards will take him? He'd fit well with Sarr in the frontcourt.

Texas Chuck wrote:Nets would not be the team turning this down. They don't need all these picks and to get an unprotected 1st back for low level 1sts? What are we even doing here?

There's just a split in our community around the value of far out future unprotected FRPs.

- those that can conceptualise the extreme variance that can happen season to season that worsens for every season out and when you consider random injury.
- those that just assume current team will be the same team in that future.

TheNetsFan wrote:

zimpy27 wrote:

TheNetsFan wrote:3 worst of picks from multiple contenders that likely never approach #19.

I presume with the Nuggets pick, you're referring to when they got Strawther? The ended up being a net of #29 and a 2nd for a future 1st.

You don't think least favourable of Minny or Cavs can't be close to pick 19 in 2027 or 2029?

No. Both teams have young players that will likely br top 5 or 10 players by then, if not there already.

Another example of future picks for now picks is Minny trading an unprotected '31 and a top 1 protected '30 swap for #8.

Market value is more along the lines of just #19 or #26+#27 for a future unprotected pick (or a very lightly protected one that rolls over for multiple shots to convey), especially in what is considered a very strong, deep draft.

That's a good example. Nets have the 8th pick too. We could literally do the same trade, but I figured they might want to consolidate those picks.Nets have 8, 19, 26, 27, and 36. Those are like lottery numbers. They have 13% of the picks I'm the first round.

zimpy27 wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:Nets would not be the team turning this down. They don't need all these picks and to get an unprotected 1st back for low level 1sts? What are we even doing here?

There's just a split in our community around the value of far out future unprotected FRPs.

- those that can conceptualise the extreme variance that can happen season to season that worsens for every season out and when you consider random injury.
- those that just assume current team will be the same team in that future.

Or those that overvalue variance, overrate the upside and underrate the downside of distant picks. The median value of a future pick is a mid first rounder, and typically future picks have slightly discounted valuations compared to current picks, similar to the time value of money. #19 is a mid first in a deep draft. You don't trade it plus more for a 60% (or less with expansion) chance that it might be a higher pick in a maybe strong/weak/ok draft of yet not scouted middle schoolers without other incentive.