What would you ask ATL for Sanders?

[AussieBuck]

You just asked Horford, the BKN pick, a top prospect (at a position where you really need help) and a 6th Man of the Year candidate, PLUS salary relief ... for Larry Sanders.

Er, uh, thanks for your opinion?

We don't need to trade Sanders. One of the few things our organization has gotten right is properly valuing his defense.

We don't need to trade Larry. Bowl us over, or enjoy Gustavo Ayon. Either way, we're fine.

So you want to trade Henson?

[cinematographer]

We don't need to trade Sanders. One of the few things our organization has gotten right is properly valuing his defense.

We don't need to trade Larry. Bowl us over, or enjoy Gustavo Ayon. Either way, we're fine.

So you want to trade Henson?

What I "want" is another top-3 pick. I want 2 of Wiggins, Embiid and Exum (and Parker, I suppose).

I also, long-term, don't want to see Sanders and Henson sharing the court for any extended minutes: Giannis -- and the pick -- should have as much space as possible to operate when going to the rim.

I'm fine with keeping both Sanders and Henson, and having one -- probably Henson -- back up the other. We have Henson cheap for two years and then the qualifying offer: it isn't a decision we need to make now.

Henson's Opp. FGP at the Rim is 41.9% so far. For reference, Hibbert is at 41.3%. If that's sustainable for Henson -- and IF his rotations and positioning come around as much as Sanders' did -- then I would hope to extend Henson and trade -- or have already traded -- Sanders.

A brief wander to connect two paths: acquiring two top-3 picks in this upcoming draft would take... a lot. A whole hell of a lot. We're already doing the hard part of getting one. As a thought experiment, let's say each of the top-3 picks costs $100 to buy. Our ineptitude is going to hopefully see us with $100 in our hands come draft time, "free of charge". Because of that, I'm willing to overpay for a second top-3 pick. Say, paying $150 for $100. Yes, that transaction alone, it's an overpay, but us already having $100 for free justifies it for me.

To acquire that second pick, I'd first offer our 2015 first and our 2017 first. I doubt it's enough. Anyways, with how awful the East is, a core comprised of Giannis, Middleton, Knight, Sanders, Henson, and anything we get out of Ilyasova, with two of Wiggins/Embiid/Exum (or Parker) makes the playoffs -- assuming a competent coach is at the helm. In the risk/reward assessment, I don't think it's that big of a gamble.

I also think that, if you remove one of Sanders and Henson from that core, you still have a promising enough core to make the playoffs moving forward, with the same caveat as before. And with Embiid being one of the potential top picks, maybe a team would have to think about taking one of the bigs, with a pick -- or two picks, or a pick and a pick-swap -- for their draft slot. And, along that line of thinking, since Henson has more value, if that team would demand Henson and not Sanders or just picks, well, bye, John, thanks for all you've done.

I'll put it like this. I think having a core of Giannis/Middleton/Henson/Sanders/Knight/Wolters/Miroslav, with two of Exum/Wiggins/Parker is worth not having two future firsts. The stars are there, the D is there, and, should Mayo and Zaza be traded, we can afford to overpay for, say, Kawhi Leonard, use our Bird Rights on everyone to re-sign them even if we're over the cap and, well, just grow and win. I also think a core Giannis/Middleton/Knight/Wolters/Miroslav/Embiid, with one of Henson and Sanders, and one of Exum/Wiggins/Parker, is worth trading one of our bigs and a future first -- and potentially even more.

This team has pieces in place that, should the right coach be brought in, two of the top picks of this draft could help this team reach success a lot earlier than most rebuilds. I think it's a gamble worth taking. We aren't signing a star in free agency. We need the draft. We already found one. We look to be getting a second. Nabbing a third, with our complement of shooters and rim protectors, would be a huge score.

So, like I said earlier in the thread. I'm not trading either of Sanders or Henson unless I'm absolutely floored by what's being offered. If I'm trading one of them, it's either down the road or to acquire another top pick.

Who I want to trade, immediately, is Zaza. Zaza and Mayo. They have got to go. I'd take back any contract shorter than three years with them, and give them the Gooden/Hedo treatment for two seasons if need be. Give me Charlie V for Mayo. Or Ben Gordon. Whoever. Find me any expiring or like-salary-matching two-years-remaining for Zaza. Zaza is grossly overpaid for his role on this team, Mayo is, at this point, just bad, and there's a real risk of losing any chance of ditching him if it isn't done soon. I want as much space as possible in 2015 -- maybe Kawhi becomes available, and even if he doesn't, Middleton's new contract could conceivably push a status-quo roster over the cap, if Zaza and Mayo are still around.

[hege53190]

Atlanta just doesn't make sense. It would be OK to get the Brooklyn pick and Schroder but it doesn't really excite me. Add to it that they don't really have any matching salaries and this trade is dead on concept.

Schroder has looked awful and Brooklyn is looking better. Right now if I was a betting man I would bet that the Brooklyn pick is mid to late teens. The fact that the Atlanta fan didn't think this would be the asking price pretty much was confirmation that he was looking to steal Sanders for basically nothing.

I know Schroder is young and far from a finished product but 35% shooting is 35% shooting. 11% from 3 is 11% from 3. 1.5 turnovers per game in just 12 minutes is terrible.

[parson]

Schroder has looked awful and Brooklyn is looking better. Right now if I was a betting man I would bet that the Brooklyn pick is mid to late teens. The fact that the Atlanta fan didn't think this would be the asking price pretty much was confirmation that he was looking to steal Sanders for basically nothing.

That's not fair. You twist your perspective this way and that and, all of a sudden, I'm stealing. Schröder is a top prospect (but Jeff Teague's been great) and most people still think the pick's going to be high. Don't believe me? Try convincing all YOUR fans to stop asking for the pick. Nogueira's a very interesting prospect, as well. Take a minute and look him up.

I know Schroder is young and far from a finished product but 35% shooting is 35% shooting. 11% from 3 is 11% from 3. 1.5 turnovers per game in just 12 minutes is terrible.

And wonderful talent is wonderful talent. Fantastic vision is fantastic vision. Great defensive skills and talent is great defensive skills and talent. The ability to get to the basket ... any ... time ... he ... wants is - well, you get the idea.

I offered value ... AND offered to discuss more. You guys are the ones demanding a potentially top-3 lottery pick - and more - for a player y'all have soured on and have already been shopping.

[paulpressey25]

Parson,

I still think this thing comes back to Horford. He's damaged goods, but I think I'd be willing to give up more than Sanders. The question is what.

Assuming the Hawks want to win this season, that deal makes a ton of sense. And arguably Sanders could provide more of a true center look to go with Milsap.

[emunney]

Agree with cinematographer in that it's not going to hurt us to have Henson backing up Sanders, except in the L column. I think we have until October 2015 to make that determination. Before then, something coming back needs to motivate me to make the trade.

[ChuckBros4Life]

Atlanta just doesn't make sense. It would be OK to get the Brooklyn pick and Schroder but it doesn't really excite me. Add to it that they don't really have any matching salaries and this trade is dead on concept.

Schroder has looked awful and Brooklyn is looking better. Right now if I was a betting man I would bet that the Brooklyn pick is mid to late teens. The fact that the Atlanta fan didn't think this would be the asking price pretty much was confirmation that he was looking to steal Sanders for basically nothing.

I know Schroder is young and far from a finished product but 35% shooting is 35% shooting. 11% from 3 is 11% from 3. 1.5 turnovers per game in just 12 minutes is terrible.

You're really gonna base your opinion off of that small of a sample size (48 shots, only 9 threes)?

His d-league stats where he actually had a consistent role look better, 48%fg, 29%3pt, 6.7 assists

The guy is 20 years old. We don't need a player whose got it all figured out right now in return for Sanders. I'd prefer we get a raw guy actually for the sake of the tank

[Nebula1]

I'd strongly consider a pick + prospect so Schroeder and 1st might work for me.

[parson]

Parson,

I still think this thing comes back to Horford. He's damaged goods, but I think I'd be willing to give up more than Sanders. The question is what.

Assuming the Hawks want to win this season, that deal makes a ton of sense. And arguably Sanders could provide more of a true center look to go with Milsap.

Not looking to trade Horford, as we'd insist on Sanders, Antetokounmpo and your 2014 pick, then someone here would show up drunk with a gun ...

[hege53190]

Schroder has looked awful and Brooklyn is looking better. Right now if I was a betting man I would bet that the Brooklyn pick is mid to late teens. The fact that the Atlanta fan didn't think this would be the asking price pretty much was confirmation that he was looking to steal Sanders for basically nothing.

That's not fair. You twist your perspective this way and that and, all of a sudden, I'm stealing. Schröder is a top prospect (but Jeff Teague's been great) and most people still think the pick's going to be high. Don't believe me? Try convincing all YOUR fans to stop asking for the pick. Nogueira's a very interesting prospect, as well. Take a minute and look him up.

I know Schroder is young and far from a finished product but 35% shooting is 35% shooting. 11% from 3 is 11% from 3. 1.5 turnovers per game in just 12 minutes is terrible.

And wonderful talent is wonderful talent. Fantastic vision is fantastic vision. Great defensive skills and talent is great defensive skills and talent. The ability to get to the basket ... any ... time ... he ... wants is - well, you get the idea.

I offered value ... AND offered to discuss more. You guys are the ones demanding a potentially top-3 lottery pick - and more - for a player y'all have soured on and have already been shopping.

Fair enough. There are a portion of Bucks fans that have been shopping Sanders. I wouldn't mind moving him for the right price because Henson and him seem pretty redundant and Sanders probably wins more games for us this year than we would without him.

However while this offer might be a better value than what I have seen in the past I value Sanders much more than this.

[buckboy]

Schroeder and the Brooklyn pick. Nothing more nothing less.

The Brooklyn pick won't be top 3 either. They're bad but they're not bad enough to beat out multiple teams trying to be bad. I'd say it lands 10-15 and I'd be happy with that. Draft Wiggins and Cauley-Stein and the future looks pretty damn bright.

Schroeder, Wolters, Wiggins, Giannis, Henson, Cauley-Stein is a core I could get behind. All under 24 too.

[ConoverBucks]

Unless a third team is brought in or Horford or Millsap are added a deal really wouldn't work financially.

So I really don't see a deal here. Schroder and the Brooklyn pick would be great but don't work financially and I don't see ATL doing that. Horford would be great as well but ATL isn't trading him.

[ConoverBucks]

Schroeder and the Brooklyn pick. Nothing more nothing less.

The Brooklyn pick won't be top 3 either. They're bad but they're not bad enough to beat out multiple teams trying to be bad. I'd say it lands 10-15 and I'd be happy with that. Draft Wiggins and Cauley-Stein and the future looks pretty damn bright.

Schroeder, Wolters, Wiggins, Giannis, Henson, Cauley-Stein is a core I could get behind. All under 24 too.

If the Bucks trade Sanders, it is because they don't think Henson and Sanders can work together. So why would they then draft Cauley-Stein? He'd be just as bad a fit next to Henson as Sanders.

[buckboy]

Schroeder and the Brooklyn pick. Nothing more nothing less.

The Brooklyn pick won't be top 3 either. They're bad but they're not bad enough to beat out multiple teams trying to be bad. I'd say it lands 10-15 and I'd be happy with that. Draft Wiggins and Cauley-Stein and the future looks pretty damn bright.

Schroeder, Wolters, Wiggins, Giannis, Henson, Cauley-Stein is a core I could get behind. All under 24 too.

If the Bucks trade Sanders, it is because they don't think Henson and Sanders can work together. So why would they then draft Cauley-Stein? He'd be just as bad a fit next to Henson as Sanders.

I'm not married to WCS. I just like his game. I certainly wouldn't draft for need if I was running the Bucks. Just take the best player on the board and the rest will work itself out. If there was a good 4 at that spot I might consider it for fit, but I'd just concentrate on talent for the most part.

[ConoverBucks]

Schroeder and the Brooklyn pick. Nothing more nothing less.

The Brooklyn pick won't be top 3 either. They're bad but they're not bad enough to beat out multiple teams trying to be bad. I'd say it lands 10-15 and I'd be happy with that. Draft Wiggins and Cauley-Stein and the future looks pretty damn bright.

Schroeder, Wolters, Wiggins, Giannis, Henson, Cauley-Stein is a core I could get behind. All under 24 too.

If the Bucks trade Sanders, it is because they don't think Henson and Sanders can work together. So why would they then draft Cauley-Stein? He'd be just as bad a fit next to Henson as Sanders.

I'm not married to WCS. I just like his game. I certainly wouldn't draft for need if I was running the Bucks. Just take the best player on the board and the rest will work itself out. If there was a good 4 at that spot I might consider it for fit, but I'd just concentrate on talent for the most part.

Gotcha. I agree that they need to draft the most talented players. I like Payne from Michigan State. He could be a good starter at the 4/ back up big.
If WCS is the most talented player at that pick I'd have no problems with the Bucks taking him, just wouldn't care for them specifically targeting him or reaching for him.

[trwi7]

Gotta love fans of other teams coming over here asking what we would want for a player and them getting mad when what we want isn't what they want to give up.

[parson]

82 thousand posts and a "Certified Bucks Hater," yet I'm the one who's angry? Glad I came along to make you feel better.

(But seriously for a minute, how'd you trick the RealGM post counter so badly that it credits you with 82,000+? Do you write code?)

[trwi7]

82 thousand posts and a "Certified Bucks Hater," yet I'm the one who's angry? Glad I came along to make you feel better.

(But seriously for a minute, how'd you trick the RealGM post counter so badly that it credits you with 82,000+? Do you write code?)

You really don't want to start this with me, so I'll just post this here.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q27YiPRiewg[/youtube]

[bizarro]

82 thousand posts and a "Certified Bucks Hater," yet I'm the one who's angry? Glad I came along to make you feel better.

(But seriously for a minute, how'd you trick the RealGM post counter so badly that it credits you with 82,000+? Do you write code?)

After each Game Thread Twirlz masterfully creates, the MOMA pledges 5,000 posts in his honor. It's the least they could do.

[Ayt]

Gotta love fans of other teams coming over here asking what we would want for a player and them getting mad when what we want isn't what they want to give up.

In fairness, it is pretty **** stupid for people to be posting trades including Horford. You then had cinematographer posting a trade for Sanders that looked similar to something like Shaq to Miami.