Official Trade Thread Part XLVII

[LyricalRico]

There is a way to trade for Young and Kuminga, but it would require Kispert, CJ, AJ and Branham being shipped out.

I don't mind trading for Kuminga if it means we can reduce the protections of the Golden State pick in 2030 to like top 8 protected or something.

Was thinking something similar today, wouldn't be mad if something like that happened.

[gambitx777]

It's pretty important that we trade CJ we can't keep winning like this

Sent from my SM-S926U1 using RealGM mobile app

There are no teams out there with the contract to trade for him. We're going to end up buying him out. But it will look bad to do so prior to the Trade Deadline.

That is just factually untrue.

Maybe we don't get what we want for him and we don't move him but this idea that no one's gonna trade for him cuz they can get him for free is silly we don't have to let him go we can just hold on to him till the end of the year and we have done that with players before on guys we wanted to move but couldn't get what we wanted.

CJ is a core vet I don't see us letting him go for nothing so there is leverage there if we are signaling that we aren't gonna buy him out no matter what. He's playing very well. There is a reason most buy out guys are never truly impactful additions

It's because if they guy has value someone will normally pay for it.

Sent from my SM-S926U1 using RealGM mobile app

[Dark Faze]

Yea it’s code red

This draft has 3 franchise players minimum in the top 3. Generational fumble if we don’t secure a bottom 4 record. Optics are irrelevant.

Can we do Van Vleet and a second for CJ?

[9 and 20]

CJ is was the players union president until recently so he'd probably narc on us if we told him to we need him to help us start losing more. Trade him already, Dawkins.

[TGW]

It's pretty important that we trade CJ we can't keep winning like this

Sent from my SM-S926U1 using RealGM mobile app

There are no teams out there with the contract to trade for him. We're going to end up buying him out. But it will look bad to do so prior to the Trade Deadline.

That is just factually untrue.

Maybe we don't get what we want for him and we don't move him but this idea that no one's gonna trade for him cuz they can get him for free is silly we don't have to let him go we can just hold on to him till the end of the year and we have done that with players before on guys we wanted to move but couldn't get what we wanted.

CJ is a core vet I don't see us letting him go for nothing so there is leverage there if we are signaling that we aren't gonna buy him out no matter what. He's playing very well. There is a reason most buy out guys are never truly impactful additions

It's because if they guy has value someone will normally pay for it.

Sent from my SM-S926U1 using RealGM mobile app

I think you're misunderstanding Nate. He's trying to say that it's going to be difficult to trade him because it's hard to find matching salaries to make a trade legal.

Any team could use CJ right now. I would love to keep him as a vet presence but he;s a little too good for my liking. He's clearly messing up the tank.

They need to start Carrington again...that would re-ignite the tank for sure.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Unless you can show me your source of all eight years, I believe you're mistaken.

Here is the win/loss record for Trae in every game that he has started:
2019: 29-52
2020: 18-42
2021: 36-27
2022: 40-36
2023: 38-35
2024: 22-32
2025: 36-40
2026: 2-8

Total: 221-272 (.448)
Total ignoring his first 2 seasons when the team was still rebuilding: 174-178 (.494)

Atlanta's win-loss record in games without Trae starting:
2019: 0-1
2020: 2-5
2021: 5-4
2022: 3-3
2023: 3-6
2024: 14-14
2025: 4-2
2026: 13-13

Total: 44-48 (.478)
Total ignoring first 2 seasons: 42-42 (.500)

The team was not a winning team with Trae, even if you ignore the first two rebuilding seasons. And the team has won more without Trae than with him. (Note, I did this analysis a little over a week ago and I didn't update it, so the 2026 might be slightly changed by now.)

Thanks for putting in the effort. I don't see it being illusory. The Hawks suck either way.

[Dat2U]

Unless you can show me your source of all eight years, I believe you're mistaken.

Here is the win/loss record for Trae in every game that he has started:
2019: 29-52
2020: 18-42
2021: 36-27
2022: 40-36
2023: 38-35
2024: 22-32
2025: 36-40
2026: 2-8

Total: 221-272 (.448)
Total ignoring his first 2 seasons when the team was still rebuilding: 174-178 (.494)

Atlanta's win-loss record in games without Trae starting:
2019: 0-1
2020: 2-5
2021: 5-4
2022: 3-3
2023: 3-6
2024: 14-14
2025: 4-2
2026: 13-13

Total: 44-48 (.478)
Total ignoring first 2 seasons: 42-42 (.500)

The team was not a winning team with Trae, even if you ignore the first two rebuilding seasons. And the team has won more without Trae than with him. (Note, I did this analysis a little over a week ago and I didn't update it, so the 2026 might be slightly changed by now.)

Thanks for putting in the effort. I don't see it being illusory. The Hawks suck either way.

From 2019 to 2023, the Hawks were better with Trae based on what Nate presented. The last 3 years have gone the other way... which coincides with his decline defensively from simply being bad to becoming a complete turnstile. Bad habits formed. Can it go the other way? We're paying $50 mil to find out but I do think he raises the floor over the PG play we've been getting. We're winning with C.J. for goodness sakes! A motivated Trae with 3rd year Sarr & Kyshawn, 2nd yr Tre & Will, 4th yr Bilal & what ever high lottery stud we add will have us in the playoffs next year!

[payitforward]

Why did we want to make this trade? I just don't get it.

Obviously, it was cheap: on the assumption that CJ himself had no trade value (a fair assumption, I'd say), it seems that, in effect, we traded Corey Kispert for Trae Young.

Now, I like Corey & would have been happy for him to play his whole career with us. But... no one can say it'll be hard to replace his productivity: it won't be. So, the cost was negligible.

But, how does acquiring Trae help us? How does it affect us at all?

Well, first off, I don't think it's likely to make us better this year! I.e. it shouldn't cost us our high R1 pick. Maybe it'll even make us worse.

But, how about beyond this season?

If we don't pick up Trae's option, then we will have traded Kispert for, in effect, nothing. Hence, I assume we will pick up Trae's option.

Whereupon we'll have a veteran point guard with a really big expiring salary who isn't worth much on the trade market. He'll be expiring, Ok, the pain is short term, but still....

...why did we want to make this trade?

Where is the potenial benefit? I just don't get it.

[AFM]

Why did we want to make this trade? I just don't get it.

Obviously, it was cheap: on the assumption that CJ himself had no trade value (a fair assumption, I'd say), it seems that, in effect, we traded Corey Kispert for Trae Young.

Now, I like Corey & would have been happy for him to play his whole career with us. But... no one can say it'll be hard to replace his productivity: it won't be. So, the cost was negligible.

But, how does acquiring Trae help us? How does it affect us at all?

Well, first off, I don't think it's likely to make us better this year! I.e. it shouldn't cost us our high R1 pick. Maybe it'll even make us worse.

But, how about beyond this season?

If we don't pick up Trae's option, then we will have traded Kispert for, in effect, nothing. Hence, I assume we will pick up Trae's option.

Whereupon we'll have a veteran point guard with a really big expiring salary who isn't worth much on the trade market. He'll be expiring, Ok, the pain is short term, but still....

...why did we want to make this trade?

Where is the potenial benefit? I just don't get it.

Buying low on a former all NBA player and the best assist guy in the league--Johnson and Sarr and Bilal and George will be playing with a proper PG, not just a proper PG but the best passer in the league. Think that's worth anything?

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Here is the win/loss record for Trae in every game that he has started:
2019: 29-52
2020: 18-42
2021: 36-27
2022: 40-36
2023: 38-35
2024: 22-32
2025: 36-40
2026: 2-8

Total: 221-272 (.448)
Total ignoring his first 2 seasons when the team was still rebuilding: 174-178 (.494)

Atlanta's win-loss record in games without Trae starting:
2019: 0-1
2020: 2-5
2021: 5-4
2022: 3-3
2023: 3-6
2024: 14-14
2025: 4-2
2026: 13-13

Total: 44-48 (.478)
Total ignoring first 2 seasons: 42-42 (.500)

The team was not a winning team with Trae, even if you ignore the first two rebuilding seasons. And the team has won more without Trae than with him. (Note, I did this analysis a little over a week ago and I didn't update it, so the 2026 might be slightly changed by now.)

Thanks for putting in the effort. I don't see it being illusory. The Hawks suck either way.

From 2019 to 2023, the Hawks were better with Trae based on what Nate presented. The last 3 years have gone the other way... which coincides with his decline defensively from simply being bad to becoming a complete turnstile. Bad habits formed. Can it go the other way? We're paying $50 mil to find out but I do think he raises the floor over the PG play we've been getting. We're winning with C.J. for goodness sakes! A motivated Trae with 3rd year Sarr & Kyshawn, 2nd yr Tre & Will, 4th yr Bilal & what ever high lottery stud we add will have us in the playoffs next year!

What do you think? Trust me, Dat, this was a steal!

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[payitforward]

Okay fine... if Gilbert likes it, I'll work on loking it too....

[penbeast0]

Saw this one posted . . . Spurs trade Jeremy Sochan to Washingon for Cam Whitmore. Whitmore is injured but has NBA level scoring ability, Sochan has fallen out of rotation due to his lack of shooing but can play NBA defense. What do y'all think of this?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/wizards-encouraged-to-deal-injured-wing-for-stalling-defender/ar-AA1TQeNz?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=a75ff2a1b5ad43b685436f9fccbdd9b0&ei=38

[nate33]

Saw this one posted . . . Spurs trade Jeremy Sochan to Washingon for Cam Whitmore. Whitmore is injured but has NBA level scoring ability, Sochan has fallen out of rotation due to his lack of shooing but can play NBA defense. What do y'all think of this?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/wizards-encouraged-to-deal-injured-wing-for-stalling-defender/ar-AA1TQeNz?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=a75ff2a1b5ad43b685436f9fccbdd9b0&ei=38

Sure. I'd do it. We have a glut at the small forward position anyway. I'd rather turn one of them into a true power forward.

The main drawback is Sochan is a free agent this summer and we could probably obtain him for nothing if we waited. But then, we are tight on roster spots too, so we would need to unload someone like Whitmore to accommodate Sochan in the offseason anyhow.

Sochan looked like he was destined to be a useful player as recently as last season. I would like to know what happened to Sochan this year. His per-minute production fell off a cliff and his foul rate skyrocketed.

[payitforward]

Hard to imagine the Spurs as a frandhise that would be interested in Cam.

[tontoz]

CJ is was the players union president until recently so he'd probably narc on us if we told him to we need him to help us start losing more. Trade him already, Dawkins.

Dawkins....."okay"

[9 and 20]

The other injured/buy low guys out there are Kuminga and Sabonis. Maybe a few others. Any chance we go after one of them with Midds' contract and whoever else?

I think trading Bagley and replacing his minutes with Vuk will just about 100% lock in the tank. Bags could bring back something pretty decent, too.

[keynote]

Read on Twitter

[nate33]

The other injured/buy low guys out there are Kuminga and Sabonis. Maybe a few others. Any chance we go after one of them with Midds' contract and whoever else?

I think trading Bagley and replacing his minutes with Vuk will just about 100% lock in the tank. Bags could bring back something pretty decent, too.

I wonder if any contending teams with a pick in the 22-26 range would pick swap with our OKC pick in exchange for landing Bagley. Would Boston consider this? The Lakers?

[nate33]

Read on Twitter

FWIW, Zion's contract is partially non-guaranteed.

According to Spotrac:

Contract details per The Athletic/Mike Vorkunov (12/21/23)
Guaranteed seasons became non-guaranteed due to games played clause:
2024-25: 50% guaranteed, fully guaranteed 1/7/25
2025-26: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed 7/15/25
2026-27: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed 7/15/26
2027-28: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed 7/15/27
Guarantee triggers exist if certain criteria has been met:
20% of 2025-26 salary becomes guaranteed if passes all six of his weigh-in checkpoints during the 2024-25 season
40% of 2025-26 salary becomes guaranteed if plays >= 41 games during 2024-25 season, additional 20% if plays >= 51 games, remaining 20% if plays >= 61 games.
Salaries for 2026-27 and 2027-28 seasons can be re-guaranteed if above metrics are hit the season prior

He has played 23 games so far. I guess he might hit that 41 game limit, but probably not the 51. So I guess 40% of his salary next year is guaranteed.

[payitforward]

I wonder if any contending teams with a pick in the 22-26 range would pick swap with our OKC pick in exchange for landing Bagley. Would Boston consider this? The Lakers?

Nice!
That said... I'm starting to like having Bagley around!

Then again, a move up to 18, 19 or 20 would likely get us a very good prospect -- Youssoufou, Cenac or Anderson....