RealGM

Revised.

I am going to breakout a couple of trade ideas to promote some discussion here.

The 1st trade is a risky one with some opportunity cost. First lets lay out some assumptions. 1st is we are able to bring back Jones but decide that Anderson is expendable since other teams are will to give him a full MLE over 4 years. This is also after we have explored other options in FA like LaVine but are rebuffed.

Memphis trades: Melton, Adams, pick 22
Memphis receives: Hayward, pick 13, and a future LP protected 1st from 3rd team

3rd Team receives: Melton and a future LP protected 1st, sends out bad expiring.

Charlotte Trades: Hayward and 13
Charlotte receives: Adams, expiring contract from 3rd team in Melton deal, and 22.

Charlotte is able to address their center position and get off the rest of Hayward's contract.

For Memphis: Hayward still has the upside to be clearly our 4th best and sometimes 3rd best player if he is on the court. He gives us an efficient secondary wing shot creator that we sorely need. His D is slipping with age/injuries but he is not a big negative there. We have a chance to swap our pick next year....something like a 25-15 type of jump. This allows us to use the MLE on a replacement frontcourt player like Bamba, Hartenstein, Jalen Smith, Boucher, etc to fill in for the lost of Adams.

Now the downside....Hayward is likely to miss big chunks of the season due to injuries, and could be in street cloths when we need him the most in the playoffs. We have the depth to survive him missing some games, and could give him rest and less minutes in hope of keeping him healthy for the playoffs. We also likely have a chance for a max cap space in 2023 but acquiring Hayward kills that option and if he plays poorly or gets injured again the price to turn him into cap space is likely more than a single 1st. We also have to find a guard to replace Melton.

Would you do it?

I think I'd want a better asset than the original proposed pick swap that becomes 2nds just because I think there is a real chance Charlotte makes the playoffs next year but it is far from guaranteed. I'd want like Top 8 protections on the swap to give us a chance at upside. Hayward could be good, but he has been hurt often and is a lot of money so an asset to help account for that risk would make me feel a lot better. Hayward would be a good piece to have and would allow us to keep multiple high level players on the court at all times in the playoffs, but I question if he'd actually start for us. In a vacuum I think he is better than Brooks if fully healthy, but we may need the defense Brooks provides in most matchups. Not a huge deal and he would still get solid minutes every game, but that may cap his benefit to us as our team tries to compensate for Ja's subpar defense. If Ja is healthy and able to step up on defense then it could help negate the need for Brooks and allow Hayward to start instead. I just don't feel great gambling on that ha. For what it is worth, I don't know if max cap space next offseason would net us a true difference maker or not. I don't see a great FA that would pick us (outside of drafting Bronny and getting LBJ) though we could always try trading for one and cap space could be a sizeable asset.

I think something involving picks from this year is probably the direction to go in terms of compensation though not the Melton/22/29 version that was posted on the T&T board ha. I wonder if Charlotte would be wiling to pay to get off Hayward and get additional space or not? They could always work in a S&T in your proposed deal as well if they wanted in order to help them get additional value.

VCfor3 wrote:I think I'd want a better asset than the original proposed pick swap that becomes 2nds just because I think there is a real chance Charlotte makes the playoffs next year but it is far from guaranteed. I'd want like Top 8 protections on the swap to give us a chance at upside. Hayward could be good, but he has been hurt often and is a lot of money so an asset to help account for that risk would make me feel a lot better. Hayward would be a good piece to have and would allow us to keep multiple high level players on the court at all times in the playoffs, but I question if he'd actually start for us. In a vacuum I think he is better than Brooks if fully healthy, but we may need the defense Brooks provides in most matchups. Not a huge deal and he would still get solid minutes every game, but that may cap his benefit to us as our team tries to compensate for Ja's subpar defense. If Ja is healthy and able to step up on defense then it could help negate the need for Brooks and allow Hayward to start instead. I just don't feel great gambling on that ha. For what it is worth, I don't know if max cap space next offseason would net us a true difference maker or not. I don't see a great FA that would pick us (outside of drafting Bronny and getting LBJ) though we could always try trading for one and cap space could be a sizeable asset.

I think something involving picks from this year is probably the direction to go in terms of compensation though not the Melton/22/29 version that was posted on the T&T board ha. I wonder if Charlotte would be wiling to pay to get off Hayward and get additional space or not? They could always work in a S&T in your proposed deal as well if they wanted in order to help them get additional value.

The problem with doing the trade now is we would either have to include Melton (or a bunch of smaller contracts Tillie, Konchar, and one of Adama or Tilman) to match money or choose to be a cap space team before we really know if we want to go down that path and agree to the trade and execute when the cap year rolls around. Now I would include Melton but he wouldn't be going back to Charlotte unless we are compensated for him, and they likely are not going to be the team that values him the most. So maybe something along the lines of Melton to a 3rd team for a future protected 1st and a likely dead salary....then Adams and dead salary over to Charlotte. Then Charlotte does something like a 22 for 13 or 29 for 15 swap. I think if we can walk away with a future protected 1st from Melton and a Charlotte 1st round swap that would satisfy the risk and opportunity cost of taking on Hayward.

psman2 wrote:

VCfor3 wrote:I think I'd want a better asset than the original proposed pick swap that becomes 2nds just because I think there is a real chance Charlotte makes the playoffs next year but it is far from guaranteed. I'd want like Top 8 protections on the swap to give us a chance at upside. Hayward could be good, but he has been hurt often and is a lot of money so an asset to help account for that risk would make me feel a lot better. Hayward would be a good piece to have and would allow us to keep multiple high level players on the court at all times in the playoffs, but I question if he'd actually start for us. In a vacuum I think he is better than Brooks if fully healthy, but we may need the defense Brooks provides in most matchups. Not a huge deal and he would still get solid minutes every game, but that may cap his benefit to us as our team tries to compensate for Ja's subpar defense. If Ja is healthy and able to step up on defense then it could help negate the need for Brooks and allow Hayward to start instead. I just don't feel great gambling on that ha. For what it is worth, I don't know if max cap space next offseason would net us a true difference maker or not. I don't see a great FA that would pick us (outside of drafting Bronny and getting LBJ) though we could always try trading for one and cap space could be a sizeable asset.

I think something involving picks from this year is probably the direction to go in terms of compensation though not the Melton/22/29 version that was posted on the T&T board ha. I wonder if Charlotte would be wiling to pay to get off Hayward and get additional space or not? They could always work in a S&T in your proposed deal as well if they wanted in order to help them get additional value.

The problem with doing the trade now is we would either have to include Melton (or a bunch of smaller contracts Tillie, Konchar, and one of Adama or Tilman) to match money or choose to be a cap space team before we really know if we want to go down that path and agree to the trade and execute when the cap year roles around. Now I would include Melton but he wouldn't be going back to Charlotte unless we are compensated for him, and they likely are not going to be the team that values him the most. So maybe something along the lines of Melton to a 3rd team for a future protected 1st and a likely dead salary....then Adams and dead salary over to Charlotte. Then Charlotte does something like a 22 for 13 or 29 for 15 swap. I think if we can walk away with a future protected 1st from Melton and a Charlotte 1st round swap that would satisfy the risk and opportunity cost of taking on Hayward.

True. Tyus also has a bigger cap hold than I realized. Was going to say you could waive Culver and Anderson cap holds, keep Tyus, and use the rest of the cap space plus Adams, but that only works if the Tyus cap hold was half of what it actually is ha.

I wonder if Melton could get you up more from 13/15 if there isn't a team wanting to do a future 1st for Melton. The Knicks feel like the obvious candidate though moving up only 2 spots kind of hurts even it is in the lottery. 15/Melton for 11/Kemba and then either draft someone at 11 or try to package it to move up more or get a vet. 11/22/Tillman for 7 with 11 then being moved for Grant? 11 as part of a package for OG? Matching salaries would be a little tricky and we'd have to use Brooks.

I guess you could do a three team deal with TOR and CHA assuming CHA doesn't just cut us out. We would need Toronto to really want Brooks and Melton which I think is a real possibility. Both are switchy guys on defense and would git in well. Had to include three low salary guys to make it work which isn't ideal. I think Konchar and Aldama have some small value at least. Honestly I think you can get 13 instead of 15 from Charlotte and/or maybe even keep #29 given how much cap space this opens up.

TOR in: Brooks, Melton, Konchar, 15
TOR out: OG
Get a Canadian replacement for OG that honestly has as high of a ceiling but also a much lower floor plus some good young players and 15.

CHA in: Adams, Aldama, Tillie, 29
CHA out: Hayward, 15
They get off Hayward, get a short term center, and get a prospect in Aldama for moving back. Tillie they can waive and just eat his small salary.

MEM in: Hayward, OG
MEM out: Melton, Adams, Brooks, Konchar, Aldama, Tillie, 29

Resign Tyus for MLE money and front load it. Use our actual MLE on Isaiah Hartenstein or Mo Bamba ideally front loading the deal but may not be able to if we have to offer the full MLE max. 22 may need to be in the above deal to Toronto, but if not then take a swing on another perimeter player. Jaden Hardy and Jovic both would be good options. Hardy hopefully becomes your 6th man off the bench at SG. Jovic as a future Hayward replacement. If Ziaire develops then as we hope and JJJ eventually is able to handle starter minutes, your starting (or closing) lineup could be Morant/Bane/Ziaire/OG/JJJ which hopefully gives us enough offense and defense for a title. Tyus/Clarke/IH or Bamba off the bench with potentially Hayward is nasty too.

Morant/Tyus
Bane/Ziaire
OG/Hayward
JJJ/Clarke
(IH or Bamba)/Tillman

Would have a ton of lineup options. If Hayward is healthy he could be a dominate 6th man. If he isn't we still have enough good players to compete in the playoffs. The above minus Tillman is your 9-man playoff rotation. Hayward expires as OG and Bane need new contracts. Anderson you either let go or use in a S&T. He wouldn't want to be here with such a bleak prospect of getting playing time.

Just as another option for the above deal that would let us use less small contracts but Toronto gets #11 and no Melton who I think they may like. Charlotte also has to eat a contract so less appealing for them.
Trade 1
MEM in: Hayward, 11
CHA in: Adams, Kemba, 29
NYK in: Melton, 15

Trade 2
MEM in: OG
TOR in: Brooks, (one of Aldama, Konchar, or TIllie), 11

Trade 1
MEM in: Hayward, 11
CHA in: Adams, Kemba, 29
NYK in: Melton, 15

Trade 2
MEM in: OG
TOR in: Brooks, (one of Aldama, Konchar, or TIllie), 11

[/quote]

I love the target of OG but I don't think Toronto is really interested in moving OG unless a team is really overpaying. I do think 11 and Brooks could qualify as maybe a small overpayment if Brooks value is higher than I think it is.

I wonder what the best singular pick we get for Brooks right now? Minny 19 (likely need to SNT salary to us though), Dallas at 26 with the B's to match. I think Portland might be a option if they trade down the draft.

Unfortunately I think at the end of the day we are going to need Brooks more than what the trade market will give up for him.

psman2 wrote:

Trade 1
MEM in: Hayward, 11
CHA in: Adams, Kemba, 29
NYK in: Melton, 15

Trade 2
MEM in: OG
TOR in: Brooks, (one of Aldama, Konchar, or TIllie), 11

I love the target of OG but I don't think Toronto is really interested in moving OG unless a team is really overpaying. I do think 11 and Brooks could qualify as maybe a small overpayment if Brooks value is higher than I think it is.

I wonder what the best singular pick we get for Brooks right now? Minny 19 (likely need to SNT salary to us though), Dallas at 26 with the B's to match. I think Portland might be a option if they trade down the draft.

Unfortunately I think at the end of the day we are going to need Brooks more than what the trade market will give up for him.[/quote]
Rereading the OG thread on the T&T board, some were saying they thought Masai was targeting Dyson Daniels. If he somehow fell to #11 then Brooks+#11 might get that done. Then again maybe we just keep Brooks and Daniels ourself lol.

I think Brooks could get you future picks too from teams, but just this draft I think Cleveland would do Osman+14. They need a high quality perimeter defender and someone else who can handle/create a little outside of Garland would be good. Since Brooks is expiring you may need to add #29 or some 2nds, but I could see this as a move Cleveland makes without extra incentive especially if they can get him extended as well. If you added stuff maybe Portland moves #7 for Brooks+ as long as the + could be rerouted for Grant. Atlanta may also have interest at 16 if they don't think Hunter can stay healthy since they need help on defense. Most every playoff/contender would have interest in Brooks I think. High level perimeter defenders are tough to find.

VCfor3 wrote:

psman2 wrote:

Trade 1
MEM in: Hayward, 11
CHA in: Adams, Kemba, 29
NYK in: Melton, 15

Trade 2
MEM in: OG
TOR in: Brooks, (one of Aldama, Konchar, or TIllie), 11

I love the target of OG but I don't think Toronto is really interested in moving OG unless a team is really overpaying. I do think 11 and Brooks could qualify as maybe a small overpayment if Brooks value is higher than I think it is.

I wonder what the best singular pick we get for Brooks right now? Minny 19 (likely need to SNT salary to us though), Dallas at 26 with the B's to match. I think Portland might be a option if they trade down the draft.

Unfortunately I think at the end of the day we are going to need Brooks more than what the trade market will give up for him.

Rereading the OG thread on the T&T board, some were saying they thought Masai was targeting Dyson Daniels. If he somehow fell to #11 then Brooks+#11 might get that done. Then again maybe we just keep Brooks and Daniels ourself lol.

I think Brooks could get you future picks too from teams, but just this draft I think Cleveland would do Osman+14. They need a high quality perimeter defender and someone else who can handle/create a little outside of Garland would be good. Since Brooks is expiring you may need to add #29 or some 2nds, but I could see this as a move Cleveland makes without extra incentive especially if they can get him extended as well. If you added stuff maybe Portland moves #7 for Brooks+ as long as the + could be rerouted for Grant. Atlanta may also have interest at 16 if they don't think Hunter can stay healthy since they need help on defense. Most every playoff/contender would have interest in Brooks I think. High level perimeter defenders are tough to find.

I thought about Clev but I don't think we get 14 without at least 29 and likely more coming back which we can to. Their front office made that terrible LeVert deal so they don't have the best trade record. I think they overpaid for Lauri too.

I do think there would be some interest in Brooks, but his flaws on offense are too glaring for a GM not to be hesitant trading for him, but if Brooks is willing to extend on a nice number then that will help his value. But, I think Brooks is going to want 16-18m a year right now on a extension.

Side note. Not the biggest Lauri fan but what do you think about a Brooks for Lauri swap. Lauri is a plus rebounder and shooter. Not a lot of shot creations skills though, D is subpar, not much of a paint defender but can man up at the 4. Maybe something like Brooks/22 for Lauri/14. We would need to find a SF still but this would free up Adams contract to be able to be moved. Clev thinking they could play Lauri at the 3 last year was the oddest thing.

psman2 wrote:I thought about Clev but I don't think we get 14 without at least 29 and likely more coming back which we can to. Their front office made that terrible LeVert deal so they don't have the best trade record. I think they overpaid for Lauri too.

I do think there would be some interest in Brooks, but his flaws on offense are too glaring for a GM not to be hesitant trading for him, but if Brooks is willing to extend on a nice number then that will help his value. But, I think Brooks is going to want 16-18m a year right now on a extension.

Side note. Not the biggest Lauri fan but what do you think about a Brooks for Lauri swap. Lauri is a plus rebounder and shooter. Not a lot of shot creations skills though, D is subpar, not much of a paint defender but can man up at the 4. Maybe something like Brooks/22 for Lauri/14. We would need to find a SF still but this would free up Adams contract to be able to be moved. Clev thinking they could play Lauri at the 3 last year was the oddest thing.

I think Brooks will still have decent value around the league so depending on who is available at 14 I could see Cleveland having interest. Us adding 29 isn't a dealbreaker or anything.

As for the Lauri swap, I think I'd be hesitant. Both he and Brooks have their flaws, and being able to put 4 shooters around Ja would be awesome, but I think the benefit of Dillon's defense outweighs the shooting/rebounding of Lauri enough that I'd want to hold off. I don't mean this to say Brooks is untouchable or crazy valuable, but me personally I'd try my best to hold onto Brooks unless we are getting a solid perimeter player somehow to replace him (via trade or FA) or we need him as part of a bigger package for a star. Ziaire looked better at the end of the season and potentially could slot into SF as soon as next year, but Brooks being able to somewhat neutralize the best opposing perimeter player is a huge factor in the playoffs.

VCfor3 wrote:

psman2 wrote:I thought about Clev but I don't think we get 14 without at least 29 and likely more coming back which we can to. Their front office made that terrible LeVert deal so they don't have the best trade record. I think they overpaid for Lauri too.

I do think there would be some interest in Brooks, but his flaws on offense are too glaring for a GM not to be hesitant trading for him, but if Brooks is willing to extend on a nice number then that will help his value. But, I think Brooks is going to want 16-18m a year right now on a extension.

Side note. Not the biggest Lauri fan but what do you think about a Brooks for Lauri swap. Lauri is a plus rebounder and shooter. Not a lot of shot creations skills though, D is subpar, not much of a paint defender but can man up at the 4. Maybe something like Brooks/22 for Lauri/14. We would need to find a SF still but this would free up Adams contract to be able to be moved. Clev thinking they could play Lauri at the 3 last year was the oddest thing.

I think Brooks will still have decent value around the league so depending on who is available at 14 I could see Cleveland having interest. Us adding 29 isn't a dealbreaker or anything.

As for the Lauri swap, I think I'd be hesitant. Both he and Brooks have their flaws, and being able to put 4 shooters around Ja would be awesome, but I think the benefit of Dillon's defense outweighs the shooting/rebounding of Lauri enough that I'd want to hold off. I don't mean this to say Brooks is untouchable or crazy valuable, but me personally I'd try my best to hold onto Brooks unless we are getting a solid perimeter player somehow to replace him (via trade or FA) or we need him as part of a bigger package for a star. Ziaire looked better at the end of the season and potentially could slot into SF as soon as next year, but Brooks being able to somewhat neutralize the best opposing perimeter player is a huge factor in the playoffs.

Yep moving Brooks without a starting level SF already locked up will be tough. I do like Bruce Brown as a possible replacement with the MLE, not near as good on D but likely a better shooter and much lower usage. However even more undersized for a full time SF. Likely more of a Melton replacement if we move him.

But I do have an idea today. With Philly keeping their pick I was wondering about something build around 23/Thybulle for Brooks. Philly can waive the hurt Green since he is not GTD. Matching works with waiting for the pick salary to count.

Thybulle is even better on D, but his offense is very limited. Shooting is right below the acceptable level. If he can just shoot .33+% from three I think we will have enough offense to support his DPOY wing defense in our lineup. I think we would have to move on from Adams though and have more shooting/offense at the 4/5.

Maybe we have to throw back 29...is the quality of player much better at 23 versus 29. I am no draftnik, but there always seems to be 3+ guys I like at 22 and more of a dart throw at 29. So maybe not too much value giving up 29, plus we don't have the roster spots regardless so we would have to consolidate or trade for future picks if we were to keep 29/47.

Plus it gives us a small TPE or almost 5m more in cap space if we choose to go that route.

In my view, this draft’s tier 1 is top-15, so I see a good rationale behind our FO’s move for a spot within that range in exchange for a few B-level assets like Melton, Adams, 22, 29.