RealGM

GSW out: Kuminga (S&T), TJD
GSW in: Toppins, 2nd worst of UTAH/CLE/MINN/LAL 2027 1st

Indiana out: Toppins, Bradley
Indiana in: Gafford, Anderson

Dallas out: Gafford, Hardy, Powell
Dallas in: Monk, TJD, Bradley, SAC 2027 2nd

Sacramento out: Monk, 2030 LP 1st, becomes 2031 lesser of SAC/MINN 1st if not conveyed, SAC 2027 2nd
Sacramento in: Kuminga (S&T)

Utah out: Anderson, 2nd worst of 2027 1st (out of UTAH/CLE/MINN/LAL)
Utah in: Hardy, Powell SAC 2030 LP 1st, becomes 2031 lesser of SAC/MINN 1st if not conveyed

Why for GSW: add a cost controlled 3rd big and a pick for kuminga
Why for Indiana: upgrade C rotation and get back a bench forward
Why for Dallas: upgrade playmaking/scoring, also get a cheap/young 3rd big
Why for Utah: exchange a likely late pick for future one with bit higher variance
Why for Sacramento: get kuminga as rumored
Why for Kuminga: freedom

add 2nd(s) if needed

horford/post
green/toppins
butler/moody
podz/hield
curry/melton

gafford/huff
siakam/anderson
nesmith/walker
mathurin/sheppard
nembhard/mcconnell

Lively/(AD)/TJD
AD/PJ
Flagg/Marshall
Klay/Christie
Monk/Russell

Sabonis
kuminga
murray
lavine
Ellis (or Carter)

I think Indy is "comfortable enough" with Isaiah Jackson, Jay Huff, and James Wiseman (and maybe also Tony Bradley) as a platoon to not feel the need to lock themselves into Gafford/SloMo? Like, Gafford is for sure an upgrade, but not a stylistic fit, per se. Not the ideal fit long-term, that is. I don't know that they'd feel the need to make a move for him, and downgrade from Obi to SloMo in the meantime? I think they'd feel ok just holding off a bit longer for a better long-term answer?

But, come December, if Jackson/Huff is just terrible, they might flip and look for a stabilizing factor, which Gafford COULD be if he could stay healthy.

Scoot McGroot wrote:I think Indy is "comfortable enough" with Isaiah Jackson, Jay Huff, and James Wiseman (and maybe also Tony Bradley) as a platoon to not feel the need to lock themselves into Gafford/SloMo? Like, Gafford is for sure an upgrade, but not a stylistic fit, per se. Not the ideal fit long-term, that is. I don't know that they'd feel the need to make a move for him, and downgrade from Obi to SloMo in the meantime? I think they'd feel ok just holding off a bit longer for a better long-term answer?

But, come December, if Jackson/Huff is just terrible, they might flip and look for a stabilizing factor, which Gafford COULD be if he could stay healthy.

I was thinking the reverse, Jackson and Wiseman are coming off a major injury so i like them to add gafford now to stabilize the C rotation. If Huff and Jackson plays decently and earns more playing time then you can easily trade gafford for expiring and draft assets. I think Gafford/Anderson helps Indy to win now more than toppin/3rd string big would.

Godaddycurse wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:I think Indy is "comfortable enough" with Isaiah Jackson, Jay Huff, and James Wiseman (and maybe also Tony Bradley) as a platoon to not feel the need to lock themselves into Gafford/SloMo? Like, Gafford is for sure an upgrade, but not a stylistic fit, per se. Not the ideal fit long-term, that is. I don't know that they'd feel the need to make a move for him, and downgrade from Obi to SloMo in the meantime? I think they'd feel ok just holding off a bit longer for a better long-term answer?

But, come December, if Jackson/Huff is just terrible, they might flip and look for a stabilizing factor, which Gafford COULD be if he could stay healthy.

I was thinking the reverse, Jackson and Wiseman are coming off a major injury so i like them to add gafford now to stabilize the C rotation. If Huff and Jackson plays decently and earns more playing time then you can easily trade gafford for expiring and draft assets. I think Gafford/Anderson helps Indy to win now more than toppin/3rd string big would.

Maybe. I think they'd worry about getting stuck with the contract going forward if Gafford is injured early?

Plus, your deal puts Indy into the tax this year. So, it's a no-go.

I'd really be interested in a Tony Bradley for Kevin Love swap. I could see him getting some center time for Indy as a 10-15 minute a night rebounding big who can throw outlet passes, set some screens, and shoot some 3's as a trailer for 10-15 minutes a night, while being a vet in the locker room. If he'd want to play for Indy this year, that is.

Scoot McGroot wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:I think Indy is "comfortable enough" with Isaiah Jackson, Jay Huff, and James Wiseman (and maybe also Tony Bradley) as a platoon to not feel the need to lock themselves into Gafford/SloMo? Like, Gafford is for sure an upgrade, but not a stylistic fit, per se. Not the ideal fit long-term, that is. I don't know that they'd feel the need to make a move for him, and downgrade from Obi to SloMo in the meantime? I think they'd feel ok just holding off a bit longer for a better long-term answer?

But, come December, if Jackson/Huff is just terrible, they might flip and look for a stabilizing factor, which Gafford COULD be if he could stay healthy.

I was thinking the reverse, Jackson and Wiseman are coming off a major injury so i like them to add gafford now to stabilize the C rotation. If Huff and Jackson plays decently and earns more playing time then you can easily trade gafford for expiring and draft assets. I think Gafford/Anderson helps Indy to win now more than toppin/3rd string big would.

Maybe. I think they'd worry about getting stuck with the contract going forward if Gafford is injured early?

Plus, your deal puts Indy into the tax this year. So, it's a no-go.

I'd really be interested in a Tony Bradley for Kevin Love swap. I could see him getting some center time for Indy as a 10-15 minute a night rebounding big who can throw outlet passes, set some screens, and shoot some 3's as a trailer for 10-15 minutes a night, while being a vet in the locker room. If he'd want to play for Indy this year, that is.

ah you're right. would have to do a wiseman for 2nd rd minimum to get under the tax i think. I think love and Huff is a bit redundant and they have enough bench bigs as is.

Scoot McGroot wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:snip

I'd really be interested in a Tony Bradley for Kevin Love swap. I could see him getting some center time for Indy as a 10-15 minute a night rebounding big who can throw outlet passes, set some screens, and shoot some 3's as a trailer for 10-15 minutes a night, while being a vet in the locker room. If he'd want to play for Indy this year, that is.

But to be fair, I think Carlisle is pretty comfortable with Bradley? Like, they might just keep him for a bit and waive him by 1/10 guarantee date if Jackson/Wiseman are relatively healthy and Huff is an ok fit?

Godaddycurse wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:
I was thinking the reverse, Jackson and Wiseman are coming off a major injury so i like them to add gafford now to stabilize the C rotation. If Huff and Jackson plays decently and earns more playing time then you can easily trade gafford for expiring and draft assets. I think Gafford/Anderson helps Indy to win now more than toppin/3rd string big would.

Maybe. I think they'd worry about getting stuck with the contract going forward if Gafford is injured early?

Plus, your deal puts Indy into the tax this year. So, it's a no-go.

I'd really be interested in a Tony Bradley for Kevin Love swap. I could see him getting some center time for Indy as a 10-15 minute a night rebounding big who can throw outlet passes, set some screens, and shoot some 3's as a trailer for 10-15 minutes a night, while being a vet in the locker room. If he'd want to play for Indy this year, that is.

ah you're right. would have to do a wiseman for 2nd rd minimum to get under the tax i think. I think love and Huff is a bit redundant and they have enough bench bigs as is.

I think Love and Huff are quite different. Huff is a leaping and shooting big man. He can block shots, catch lobs, and shoot 3's, but he can't rebound. Love can't leap, catch lobs, or block shots, but he can rebound and shoot 3's.

I get that worry of just shuffling bench bigs, but Gafford is kind of a super bench big, too. He's a guy you're always a little bothered with starting and look to acquire someone to play over him, but he's better than 90% of bench centers in the league? I think they'd just rather see if Jackson/Huff is that or better.

Indy management really seems all-in on making Wiseman a guy, and giving Huff a MAJOR chance this year. And Jackson has always been a Carlisle guy.

I like it for the Warriors, as long as Toppin’s $14M incoming salary wouldn’t cap them at the first apron (which it might, dependent on what Kuminga would sign for and the base year compensation rules). But Toppin would be a great fit, and I love the look of that roster when all is said and done with this.

Does is really deserve a 1st to eat Hardy? I'd think a few 2nds is good enough there. Utah keeps Anderson.

3-4 2nds outgoing from Sac, keep the 1st. 1 to GS, 2-3 to Utah. Don't think Dallas deserves one either. Any difference between Monk/Gafford is easily made up by swapping Trayce/Bradley for Hardy/Powell. Utah keeps their 2nd.

Indiana stays under the tax, swaps Toppin for a center
Sac gets Kuminga for Monk + 3-4 2nds
GS doesn't get hard capped and gets the far better fit at forward.
Dallas gets Monk, dumps Hardy and picks up a few cheap big man depth pieces.
Utah gets 2-3 2nds for taking on Hardy.

If it's really a deal breaker for Utah to take Hardy, can remove 1-2 of the 2nds and swap Hardy for Saric. I'd rather the Kings keep the pick and eat the cheap contract thats what 4% of the cap?

I normally cringe (respectfully) at Godaddy's Mavs trades as I know he doesnt have a high evaluation of a lot of their guys, but this one is pretty well fleshed out. I can see a case for each of the teams. I never thought of a Gaff for Toppin based deal, I like that if Mavs could find another team willing to give up their guard for Obi. Whether Dallas can do better than Monk is the question. I do like the cheap big man solution in the OP, but dont like how both Klay and Caleb are still on the roster. Id rather one go if Monk is coming in

LightTheBeam wrote:Does is really deserve a 1st to eat Hardy? I'd think a few 2nds is good enough there. Utah keeps Anderson.

3-4 2nds outgoing from Sac, keep the 1st. 1 to GS, 2-3 to Utah. Don't think Dallas deserves one either. Any difference between Monk/Gafford is easily made up by swapping Trayce/Bradley for Hardy/Powell. Utah keeps their 2nd.

Indiana stays under the tax, swaps Toppin for a center
Sac gets Kuminga for Monk + 3-4 2nds
GS doesn't get hard capped and gets the far better fit at forward.
Dallas gets Monk, dumps Hardy and picks up a few cheap big man depth pieces.
Utah gets 2-3 2nds for taking on Hardy.

If it's really a deal breaker for Utah to take Hardy, can remove 1-2 of the 2nds and swap Hardy for Saric. I'd rather the Kings keep the pick and eat the cheap contract thats what 4% of the cap?

OP has Utah giving up one FRP and getting a different one in return. I'm not convinced that there's much upside difference between the two to warrant taking on Hardy. SloMo is essentially an expiring contract, next year is unguaranteed. I don't see the deal being harmed by the Jazz being removed. The Kings' FRP can go directly to GSW.

SkyHook wrote:

LightTheBeam wrote:Does is really deserve a 1st to eat Hardy? I'd think a few 2nds is good enough there. Utah keeps Anderson.

3-4 2nds outgoing from Sac, keep the 1st. 1 to GS, 2-3 to Utah. Don't think Dallas deserves one either. Any difference between Monk/Gafford is easily made up by swapping Trayce/Bradley for Hardy/Powell. Utah keeps their 2nd.

Indiana stays under the tax, swaps Toppin for a center
Sac gets Kuminga for Monk + 3-4 2nds
GS doesn't get hard capped and gets the far better fit at forward.
Dallas gets Monk, dumps Hardy and picks up a few cheap big man depth pieces.
Utah gets 2-3 2nds for taking on Hardy.

If it's really a deal breaker for Utah to take Hardy, can remove 1-2 of the 2nds and swap Hardy for Saric. I'd rather the Kings keep the pick and eat the cheap contract thats what 4% of the cap?

OP has Utah giving up one FRP and getting a different one in return. I'm not convinced that there's much upside difference between the two to warrant taking on Hardy. SloMo is essentially an expiring contract, next year is unguaranteed. I don't see the deal being harmed by the Jazz being removed. The Kings' FRP can go directly to GSW.

I think the current 2027 pick is projected in the mid 20s so its worth kicking back to see if it could be worth more in the future

Godaddycurse wrote:

SkyHook wrote:

LightTheBeam wrote:Does is really deserve a 1st to eat Hardy? I'd think a few 2nds is good enough there. Utah keeps Anderson.

3-4 2nds outgoing from Sac, keep the 1st. 1 to GS, 2-3 to Utah. Don't think Dallas deserves one either. Any difference between Monk/Gafford is easily made up by swapping Trayce/Bradley for Hardy/Powell. Utah keeps their 2nd.

Indiana stays under the tax, swaps Toppin for a center
Sac gets Kuminga for Monk + 3-4 2nds
GS doesn't get hard capped and gets the far better fit at forward.
Dallas gets Monk, dumps Hardy and picks up a few cheap big man depth pieces.
Utah gets 2-3 2nds for taking on Hardy.

If it's really a deal breaker for Utah to take Hardy, can remove 1-2 of the 2nds and swap Hardy for Saric. I'd rather the Kings keep the pick and eat the cheap contract thats what 4% of the cap?

OP has Utah giving up one FRP and getting a different one in return. I'm not convinced that there's much upside difference between the two to warrant taking on Hardy. SloMo is essentially an expiring contract, next year is unguaranteed. I don't see the deal being harmed by the Jazz being removed. The Kings' FRP can go directly to GSW.

I think the current 2027 pick is projected in the mid 20s so its worth kicking back to see if it could be worth more in the future

That's valid thinking, but also a lot can happen in two years. There's no lottery cap on the Jazz 2027 2nd worst pick, all four could be lottery picks (unlikely, but still), but the SAC pick in your proposal tops out at #15 or becomes a "worst of" a year later. It's probably sixes to me now, maybe 60-40 that the Kings pick is the better one in the end.

SkyHook wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

SkyHook wrote:OP has Utah giving up one FRP and getting a different one in return. I'm not convinced that there's much upside difference between the two to warrant taking on Hardy. SloMo is essentially an expiring contract, next year is unguaranteed. I don't see the deal being harmed by the Jazz being removed. The Kings' FRP can go directly to GSW.

I think the current 2027 pick is projected in the mid 20s so its worth kicking back to see if it could be worth more in the future

That's valid thinking, but also a lot can happen in two years. There's no lottery cap on the Jazz 2027 2nd worst pick, all four could be lottery picks (unlikely, but still), but the SAC pick in your proposal tops out at #15 or becomes a "worst of" a year later. It's probably sixes to me now, maybe 60-40 that the Kings pick is the better one in the end.

If we're supposing that all 4 picks could be in the lotto this year, we could also supposed that in 2031, Sacramento and Minnesota could end up 1 and 2 in the lotto, so it could be the 2nd overall pick conveying.... while a 2nd worst of 4 teams could only end up maxing out at 3rd...

Scoot McGroot wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:
Maybe. I think they'd worry about getting stuck with the contract going forward if Gafford is injured early?

Plus, your deal puts Indy into the tax this year. So, it's a no-go.

I'd really be interested in a Tony Bradley for Kevin Love swap. I could see him getting some center time for Indy as a 10-15 minute a night rebounding big who can throw outlet passes, set some screens, and shoot some 3's as a trailer for 10-15 minutes a night, while being a vet in the locker room. If he'd want to play for Indy this year, that is.

ah you're right. would have to do a wiseman for 2nd rd minimum to get under the tax i think. I think love and Huff is a bit redundant and they have enough bench bigs as is.

I think Love and Huff are quite different. Huff is a leaping and shooting big man. He can block shots, catch lobs, and shoot 3's, but he can't rebound. Love can't leap, catch lobs, or block shots, but he can rebound and shoot 3's.

I get that worry of just shuffling bench bigs, but Gafford is kind of a super bench big, too. He's a guy you're always a little bothered with starting and look to acquire someone to play over him, but he's better than 90% of bench centers in the league? I think they'd just rather see if Jackson/Huff is that or better.

Indy management really seems all-in on making Wiseman a guy, and giving Huff a MAJOR chance this year. And Jackson has always been a Carlisle guy.

Why do I suddenly hear the Jaws music playing?

Scoot McGroot wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:I think Indy is "comfortable enough" with Isaiah Jackson, Jay Huff, and James Wiseman (and maybe also Tony Bradley) as a platoon to not feel the need to lock themselves into Gafford/SloMo? Like, Gafford is for sure an upgrade, but not a stylistic fit, per se. Not the ideal fit long-term, that is. I don't know that they'd feel the need to make a move for him, and downgrade from Obi to SloMo in the meantime? I think they'd feel ok just holding off a bit longer for a better long-term answer?

But, come December, if Jackson/Huff is just terrible, they might flip and look for a stabilizing factor, which Gafford COULD be if he could stay healthy.

I was thinking the reverse, Jackson and Wiseman are coming off a major injury so i like them to add gafford now to stabilize the C rotation. If Huff and Jackson plays decently and earns more playing time then you can easily trade gafford for expiring and draft assets. I think Gafford/Anderson helps Indy to win now more than toppin/3rd string big would.

Maybe. I think they'd worry about getting stuck with the contract going forward if Gafford is injured early?

Plus, your deal puts Indy into the tax this year. So, it's a no-go.

I'd really be interested in a Tony Bradley for Kevin Love swap. I could see him getting some center time for Indy as a 10-15 minute a night rebounding big who can throw outlet passes, set some screens, and shoot some 3's as a trailer for 10-15 minutes a night, while being a vet in the locker room. If he'd want to play for Indy this year, that is.

For Indy, if you under-perform this season, you get a decent FRP to add to Hali coming back next year; if you over-perform, it is probably because one or more of the youngsters proved themselves. Either way, you get good information for who/what/when to execute a quick pivot next off-season to try to jump back into contention. Also whether Indy under-performs or over-performs, I agree with Scoot it makes little sense to get to get a questionable long-term fit at C for short-term wins; I definitely disagree with expending any assets to improve this season.

If I am Indiana I would be focused on what makes the team better in the spring of 2027. I think it makes sense to chill right where they are now ($6M below the tax line) during a gap year, and possibly sell off 1 or 2 older players at the TDL if the offers are generous enough.

We should have drafted Obi Toppin in the first place. I'm all in on this

gswhoops wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:
ah you're right. would have to do a wiseman for 2nd rd minimum to get under the tax i think. I think love and Huff is a bit redundant and they have enough bench bigs as is.

I think Love and Huff are quite different. Huff is a leaping and shooting big man. He can block shots, catch lobs, and shoot 3's, but he can't rebound. Love can't leap, catch lobs, or block shots, but he can rebound and shoot 3's.

I get that worry of just shuffling bench bigs, but Gafford is kind of a super bench big, too. He's a guy you're always a little bothered with starting and look to acquire someone to play over him, but he's better than 90% of bench centers in the league? I think they'd just rather see if Jackson/Huff is that or better.

Indy management really seems all-in on making Wiseman a guy, and giving Huff a MAJOR chance this year. And Jackson has always been a Carlisle guy.

Why do I suddenly hear the Jaws music playing?

Right? It’s a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea, but they seem set on it.

I am fine with the Utah piece of the deal, but I could take it or leave it (so, you nailed the value there).

I am not sure that Indiana should make a big trade for a center like this. Obi seemed important to their playoff run, so if they can keep him they should. That probably leaves them looking at a stopgap like Nick Richards then reconsidering their options in the offseason. Or maybe Jalen Smith returns?

babyjax13 wrote:I am fine with the Utah piece of the deal, but I could take it or leave it (so, you nailed the value there).

I am not sure that Indiana should make a big trade for a center like this. Obi seemed important to their playoff run, so if they can keep him they should. That probably leaves them looking at a stopgap like Nick Richards then reconsidering their options in the offseason. Or maybe Jalen Smith returns?

ithink toppins minutes should (eventually) go to walker. anderson gives them a 1 yr stop gap until walker proves ready. alternatively they can trade walker down the road for a C upgrade too