Woj: Deni to Portland for 14th pick and Brogdon

[The Consiglieri]

Eh, best of luck to Deni in Portland. We probably could have gotten more for him next year assuming he continues to improve. OTOH our window starts next year, assuming we get lucky in the draft, so it makes sense to get started early on the support cast. Doesn’t seem like Deni is gonna be a top 3 guy on a title team so it makes sense to sell when his valuation is at a career high.

There's a 1000% chance our window does not start next offseason. Even if we get lucky in the draft, we'll be a team with no legit weapons other than that stud in next year's class. You actually have to have a team to contend, having a superstar and Alex Sarr, and Bilal is not a window opening roster. At best we're opening the window to contending in '26. '25 is a non-starter. We simply don't have the lineup or the bench. It's crazy to think differently.

[MDStar]

you not getting that because they don't care what you think....


Deni is so overrated by wizards homers its crazy..... Dude is ok, but all this improving just to still not sniff 20ppg in year 4, is like what are we talking about..

These trades are about fully resetting the franchise.... In my entire life they still havent won 50 games in a season...... Anything other than trying to go for the top is lame..... Don't care about 1st round flame outs and early exits.....

Raise ya'll standards and maybe these idiots will stop robbing the local fans with this garbage they've put on the floor for decades....


I'm not personally coming at you but I'm sick of this **** show.... About time they got a better vision than resigning old past there prime names to sell tickets....

I agree with this! I also find it interesting that if you go back to the boards reaction to the Pascal Siakam trade from January, most people thought it was a phenomenal haul for Toronto. In that deal Pascal was traded for 2 late 2024 picks (19th overall and a later one that was ultimately traded for Kelly Olynyk and Ochoa Agbaji), a 26 late 1st rounder and Bruce Brown. When weighing age, contract and production of each player, I can’t say that I fully understand how one deal could be praised, where as the other deal is being maligned for not a great return, especially if the Wizards ultimately get something in return for Brogdon.

[The Consiglieri]

The process 2.0. That’s what this is. Anyone who hurts the tank will be ousted. That’s why Kuzma and Poole are on the team. They can market around these two bozos, make stupid bobbleheads, sell some jerseys to the loser fans who blindly support the team, and make a little bit of money while the team goes 19 and-a-billion. Why else would you consciously make a decision to have those two on the roster while trading away Deni. Deni was absolute kryptonite to their plans; him improving was phucking up the tank (and they probably didn’t see it coming, hence them resigning him). They saw the same statistics that Nate would post every week—when Deni was on the court, the team was respectable. When he sat, the team was a disgrace. Can’t have that type of player on a team where tanking is the main priority. Get him out of there.

Next year and probably the year after that, they are gunning for that most losses record. Winning games? Poooey. Major ick. Gotta amass those ping pong balls and picks. Only it didn’t work for the Sixers and it’s not going to work here.

Don't know if anyone else mentioned it, but part of this is also reversing tanking skills. Portland finished tied for 3rd worst this past year, 4th worst in SRS via basketball reference. We just got them Deni for very little of value in the present (if at all), sometimes tanking moves include improving teams you're competing against for slotting. I've done that in dynasty football from time to time. One aspect of this is weakening us and strengthening our competition. It doesn't make me support the move, because I would've wanted more in return and don't really buy that he would've moved the needle that dramatically, but it is possible.

[nate33]

you not getting that because they don't care what you think....


Deni is so overrated by wizards homers its crazy..... Dude is ok, but all this improving just to still not sniff 20ppg in year 4, is like what are we talking about..

These trades are about fully resetting the franchise.... In my entire life they still havent won 50 games in a season...... Anything other than trying to go for the top is lame..... Don't care about 1st round flame outs and early exits.....

Raise ya'll standards and maybe these idiots will stop robbing the local fans with this garbage they've put on the floor for decades....


I'm not personally coming at you but I'm sick of this **** show.... About time they got a better vision than resigning old past there prime names to sell tickets....

I agree with this! I also find it interesting that if you go back to the boards reaction to the Pascal Siakam trade from January, most people thought it was a phenomenal haul for Toronto. In that deal Pascal was traded for 2 late 2024 picks (19th overall and a later one that was ultimately traded for Kelly Olynyk and Ochoa Agbaji), a 26 late 1st rounder and Bruce Brown. When weighing age, contract and production of each player, I can’t say that I fully understand how one deal could be praised, where as the other deal is being maligned for not a great return, especially if the Wizards ultimately get something in return for Brogdon.

Pascal Siakam is 30 years old and just signed a contract that will pay him $48M a year.
Deni is 23 years old and just signed a contract that will pay him $13M a year. That's a difference of $35 MILLION DOLLARS a year. Also, at the time of the trade, Pascal was half a season away from being an unrestricted free agent.

The appropriate trade comparison is Mikal Bridges. Deni, in the second half of the season, posted better per-minute numbers across the board than Bridges while being paid 60% as much and being 4 years younger and still on the upswing. If Bridges got 5 FRP's including 4 unprotected, Deni was worth at least 3 FRP's if not 4.

Here are the per-36 numbers of Bridges and Avdija:

[MDStar]

Nate, you’re definitely way more into statistical analysis than I am, so I’ll ask you how do you apply Bridges numbers over multiple seasons, as you compare worth? Of course there is a chance that Deni continues his play into the future and continues to improve but we’re talking about a sample size of what 35 games or so for Deni versus Bridges over 160+ games over the last 2 years.

[nate33]

Nate, you’re definitely way more into statistical analysis than I am, so I’ll ask you how do you apply Bridges numbers over multiple seasons, as you compare worth? Of course there is a chance that Deni continues his play into the future and continues to improve but we’re talking about a sample size of what 35 games or so for Deni versus Bridges over 160+ games over the last 2 years.

When young players break out, you don't normally assume it's a mirage. This isn't some 27 year old having a random good stretch of play.

I included Deni's entire season to bolster my argument. Deni was awesome over the final 35 games, but he was actually nearly that good for the entire season on a per-36 basis. He just only played 27 minutes a game because our coaches are idiots. (The one thing he did figure out of the second half of the season is that Kuzmaesque eurostep shoulder-bump floater. He utilized that with great success to boost his usage over the second half of the season. And I see no reason why that was a fluke.)

Also, your argument works both ways. Yeah, Bridges has a longer track record, but it's also a pretty sure bet that he has peaked as a player and WYSIWYG. We don't know what Deni's ceiling is.

[joshuacf]

Nate, you’re definitely way more into statistical analysis than I am, so I’ll ask you how do you apply Bridges numbers over multiple seasons, as you compare worth? Of course there is a chance that Deni continues his play into the future and continues to improve but we’re talking about a sample size of what 35 games or so for Deni versus Bridges over 160+ games over the last 2 years.

When young players break out, you don't normally assume it's a mirage. This isn't some 27 year old having a random good stretch of play.

Why? There have been a ton of examples of young guys breaking out for singular seasons or parts of a single season and then regressing. Jordan Poole, Lonnie Walker, and Mikal himself all come to mind.

Mikal is a career 37.5% three point shooter with a four season track record of high-level basketball, including multiple seasons on very good Suns teams. Deni struggled for three years before a singular breakout season on a very poor Wizards team, in large part bolstered by massive gains in his three point percentage that teams could view as an anomoly.

Deni still has a below average left hand, and his relatively low free throw percentage of 74% last year signals that the three point percentage he put up last year may be inflated.

Deni does have an extra two years on his contract and he's cheaper, but it's just not realistic to look at a 35 game stretch as a reason why Deni's value should be comparable to Mikal's. Mikal is a much more proven commodity.

[nate33]

Nate, you’re definitely way more into statistical analysis than I am, so I’ll ask you how do you apply Bridges numbers over multiple seasons, as you compare worth? Of course there is a chance that Deni continues his play into the future and continues to improve but we’re talking about a sample size of what 35 games or so for Deni versus Bridges over 160+ games over the last 2 years.

When young players break out, you don't normally assume it's a mirage. This isn't some 27 year old having a random good stretch of play.

Why? There have been a ton of examples of young guys breaking out for singular seasons or parts of a single season and then regressing. Jordan Poole, Lonnie Walker, and Mikal himself all come to mind.

Mikal is a career 37.5% three point shooter with a four season track record of high-level basketball, including multiple seasons on very good Suns teams. Deni struggled for three years before a singular breakout season on a very poor Wizards team, in large part bolstered by massive gains in his three point percentage that teams could view as an anomoly.

Deni still has a below average left hand, and his relatively low free throw percentage of 74% last year signals that the three point percentage he put up last year may be inflated.

Deni does have an extra two years on his contract and he's cheaper, but it's just not realistic to look at a 35 game stretch as a reason why Deni's value should be comparable to Mikal's. Mikal is a much more proven commodity.

Deni's strong performance in the second half of the season was not due to fluke 3-point shooting. His 3P% over the last 35 games was actually just .357, well below his season average, and his volume was pretty low. Deni's improvement was because he developed actual moves and the ability to finish in the paint.

But you are right that Deni's track record of good play may not have been long enough to make him worthy of 4-5 FRP's. But in that case, you don't panic and trade him for two FRP's, you KEEP HIM because you developed him and he was playing well and he was locked into the best contract in the league. Why in the hell would a team give up on a rapidly improving 23-year old?

[joshuacf]

When young players break out, you don't normally assume it's a mirage. This isn't some 27 year old having a random good stretch of play.

Why? There have been a ton of examples of young guys breaking out for singular seasons or parts of a single season and then regressing. Jordan Poole, Lonnie Walker, and Mikal himself all come to mind.

Mikal is a career 37.5% three point shooter with a four season track record of high-level basketball, including multiple seasons on very good Suns teams. Deni struggled for three years before a singular breakout season on a very poor Wizards team, in large part bolstered by massive gains in his three point percentage that teams could view as an anomoly.

Deni still has a below average left hand, and his relatively low free throw percentage of 74% last year signals that the three point percentage he put up last year may be inflated.

Deni does have an extra two years on his contract and he's cheaper, but it's just not realistic to look at a 35 game stretch as a reason why Deni's value should be comparable to Mikal's. Mikal is a much more proven commodity.

Deni's strong performance in the second half of the season was not due to fluke 3-point shooting. His 3P% over the last 35 games was actually just .357, well below his season average, and his volume was pretty low. Deni's improvement was because he developed actual moves and the ability to finish in the paint.

But you are right that Deni's track record of good play may not have been long enough to make him worthy of 4-5 FRP's. But in that case, you don't panic and trade him for two FRP's, you KEEP HIM because you developed him and he was playing well and he was locked into the best contract in the league. Why in the hell would a team give up on a rapidly improving 23-year old?

I wasn't talking about the second half of the season specifically. Deni's improvement on the year had a lot to do with his shot. After previously being a non-threat from behind the arc, opposing teams had to start respecting his shot which opened up driving opportunities for him. That isn't to say he didn't improve in other areas, but I think it's hard to argue that going from 29.7% to 37.5% from 3 didn't provide a significant boost to his game.

I've said from the begining how that trade works out is going to be dependant on what, if anything, we end up getting from Brogdon. But the logic behind trading Deni is that the theory that a) he's peaked in value due to an outlier shooting season or b) you think Bilal/Sarr have higher ceilings and want to prioritize their development while simultaneously helping the tank.

I agree with you that that doesn't mean that you spaz out and trade him for nothing, but if Brogdon (or maybe a Brogdon Kispert package) can net a FRP, then the trade won't end up looking as bad.

[DCZards]

Very hard to compare the Bridges trade and Deni trade. The Knicks were looking for the piece it felt it needed to get them past a team like Boston and they were willing to overpay for a player who over the last few yrs has had sustained success on both ends of the court.

Portland, which is in a similar rebuilding phase as the Zards, was willing to give up 2 FRPs, 2 SRPs and Brogdon for a player who showed marked improvement last season and one that you’d expect to continue to get better. But the small-market Blazers weren’t about to give up for Deni anything close to what the big-market—and contending—Knicks were willing to give up for Bridges.

[payitforward]

The “many swings as possible approach” is what some of us on this message board wanted. It isn’t necessarily the approach to rebuilding that the Zards FO prefers.

??
I'd say we're taking a lot of swings! How much more radically can you change a team in 12 months? From the team Dawkins took over, we still have Kuzma, Kispert & Davis. That's it.

Just because I laid out how we could have gotten 6 rookies out of the 2024 draft doesn't mean that any FO would actually do such a thing! Can you think of a draft when one team wound up with 10% of all the guys drafted? (Even though, as I typed that I couldn't help thinking, "we coulda been the first!!")

In any case, I'm sure Will negotiated as good a deal for Deni as he was able to get. & it didn't bring us a pick in this year's R2. So be it.

The discussion is about “swings” in the 2024 draft. Not the totality of what has happened since the new FO took over.

Aah, I follow you.

I imagine that giving up 52 for 24 instead of 26 reflected some intel we had about other interest in George -- I.e. was a normal piece of business calculation. Hard to see it as reflecting anything the FO "prefers." You think if some team had said, "hey Will, we have this pick here which we just don't want to use -- you can have it for free," our FO would have said, "no thanks"...?

As well, every "swing" in the draft, other than the R1 & R2 picks everyone gets for free each year, comes at a cost. So, if you want an extra one, you have to pay something for it!

Now... as it happens I can imagine us having come away with 4 or 5 instead of 3 this year -- b/c there were a few guys I rated pretty highly -- but I wouldn't call that taking "as many swings as possible."

(I know I sometimes sound that way! )

[badinage]

When young players break out, you don't normally assume it's a mirage. This isn't some 27 year old having a random good stretch of play.

Why? There have been a ton of examples of young guys breaking out for singular seasons or parts of a single season and then regressing. Jordan Poole, Lonnie Walker, and Mikal himself all come to mind.

Mikal is a career 37.5% three point shooter with a four season track record of high-level basketball, including multiple seasons on very good Suns teams. Deni struggled for three years before a singular breakout season on a very poor Wizards team, in large part bolstered by massive gains in his three point percentage that teams could view as an anomoly.

Deni still has a below average left hand, and his relatively low free throw percentage of 74% last year signals that the three point percentage he put up last year may be inflated.

Deni does have an extra two years on his contract and he's cheaper, but it's just not realistic to look at a 35 game stretch as a reason why Deni's value should be comparable to Mikal's. Mikal is a much more proven commodity.

Deni's strong performance in the second half of the season was not due to fluke 3-point shooting. His 3P% over the last 35 games was actually just .357, well below his season average, and his volume was pretty low. Deni's improvement was because he developed actual moves and the ability to finish in the paint.

But you are right that Deni's track record of good play may not have been long enough to make him worthy of 4-5 FRP's. But in that case, you don't panic and trade him for two FRP's, you KEEP HIM because you developed him and he was playing well and he was locked into the best contract in the league. Why in the hell would a team give up on a rapidly improving 23-year old?

Because we’re building a system, see, and everyone has to have long wingspan, see, and has to be under 20, see, and it doesn’t matter if the guy is Jordan, see, because we’re building a system, see, and wingspan, see, and …

[Kanyewest]

you not getting that because they don't care what you think....


Deni is so overrated by wizards homers its crazy..... Dude is ok, but all this improving just to still not sniff 20ppg in year 4, is like what are we talking about..

These trades are about fully resetting the franchise.... In my entire life they still havent won 50 games in a season...... Anything other than trying to go for the top is lame..... Don't care about 1st round flame outs and early exits.....

Raise ya'll standards and maybe these idiots will stop robbing the local fans with this garbage they've put on the floor for decades....


I'm not personally coming at you but I'm sick of this **** show.... About time they got a better vision than resigning old past there prime names to sell tickets....

I agree with this! I also find it interesting that if you go back to the boards reaction to the Pascal Siakam trade from January, most people thought it was a phenomenal haul for Toronto. In that deal Pascal was traded for 2 late 2024 picks (19th overall and a later one that was ultimately traded for Kelly Olynyk and Ochoa Agbaji), a 26 late 1st rounder and Bruce Brown. When weighing age, contract and production of each player, I can’t say that I fully understand how one deal could be praised, where as the other deal is being maligned for not a great return, especially if the Wizards ultimately get something in return for Brogdon.

Pascal Siakam is 30 years old and just signed a contract that will pay him $48M a year.
Deni is 23 years old and just signed a contract that will pay him $13M a year. That's a difference of $35 MILLION DOLLARS a year. Also, at the time of the trade, Pascal was half a season away from being an unrestricted free agent.

The appropriate trade comparison is Mikal Bridges. Deni, in the second half of the season, posted better per-minute numbers across the board than Bridges while being paid 60% as much and being 4 years younger and still on the upswing. If Bridges got 5 FRP's including 4 unprotected, Deni was worth at least 3 FRP's if not 4.

Here are the per-36 numbers of Bridges and Avdija:

It is hard to use the Bridges analogy to evaluate what Deni's true value is.

- You can't ignore the Villanova factor. The Knicks were willing to pay more to get Bridges because he's close with Brunson, Hart, and Divincenzo. Plus the Knicks already have 3 success stories working out with the Villanova players.

- Bridges was in high demand whereas Deni is not. The Sacramento Kings were reportedly willing to make an offer for Bridges that included the #13 pick. Ultimately, it appears that the Kings were not as interested in Deni as they may have been able to exceed Portland's offer.

- The Wizards wanted to cash in now on a player in this years draft and target Carrington. Whereas the Knicks only traded picks in future drafts and they didn't include their 2 first rounders that they had in this year's draft (which they converted into Pacome Dadiet and I believe 5-6 2nd rounders)

- Bridges past success not only last season is a big reason for his perceived trade value. He was the 4th best player on a Suns team that made it to the finals. 2nd for defensive player of the year in 2022. Deni is a good defender though although for some reason the Deni probably doesn't get as friendly as whistle as Bridges- maybe due to past performance.

- Bridges is regarded as a better 3 point shooter. Deni did shoot 37% this season about the same as Bridges but for their careers Bridges is a much better 3 point shooter. He will probably get good good looks and for others going to the Nova Knicks.

- The Wizards chose to cash in on a prospect they like in Carrington. Maybe they wanted to open some more minutes at the 4 for Sarr - who reportedly didn't want to go to Atlanta who planned to play him at center- in the same way they opened up minutes for Deni when they traded Rui.

- Portland is a smart office- with their recent moves - it is fair to say that they didn't see Kuzma as a good value as Deni.

- But you are right that the Wizards draft trade is a risk. It might be seen as impatient given that the Wizards could likely see a better offer for Deni. But the Wizards wanted to cash in on something more tangible which was Carrington. In the same way that the Heat would rather have Justice WInslow than some unprotected picks from the Celtics.

- Time will tell on how well Deni can become. For now he's clearly underrated by NBA GMs. Maybe that value would not have seen an increase because of how dismal Washington is. Even Porzingis didn't generate much value an Washington was a mediocre team and not as terrible as Washington is now. I wish the best for Deni- at least Portland is further along in its rebuild than Washington and will have a chance to play in Portland. For better or worse he will see a familiar face on the Trail Blazers coaching staff, Scottie Brooks.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

But as you have it, defense, availability, versality, size, rebounding, passing, and intangibles are in fact all important NBA skills and traits.

Availabilty and intangibles are what you're going with? How was Deni any more available or more having in intangibles than Kispert?

Kispert is a decent player, not here to trash him but he has some flaws that are going to be hard to fix. You could play him off the floor in the playoffs if he is to ever get there because he is that bad on defense. Positionally at one point last season, he along with Kuzma and Poole were amongst the worst defensive players at each of their respective positions in the entire league according to defensive LEBRON. I didn't check out how the numbers finished, but I'd make a fair guess that he didn't move up much. Now even if you don't like that stat, there are other stats as well as the eye test that will tell you he's a really bad defender. With that said, Kispert is great a shooting volume threes and actually is really good at getting to the bucket, it's just that whatever points he gets you he gives up in spades. Watch the games, he's targeted all game long because of this.

We aren't debating who is a better player in 2024. You made excuses for Deni being a poor player when he first came into the league. "It's tough being a rookie coming into a team that's trying to win" as if there aren't multiple rookies each season that do just that.

Then I made the point that both Kispert and Rui came into the same situation as rookies and performed much better than Deni did. Then you pivoted again and made excuses for Deni because he was younger than those two. Then I pointed out that Kispert as a 22 year old rookie was as competent as a 22 year old Deni in his third season. Now you're once again reframing the argument to make this a discussion about their current abilities when it never was.

But hey, Deni came into the league as a 20 year old rookie on a team that was trying to win! There's no way anybody could be successful in such a situation, right?

Insert Scottie Barnes, Chet, Jalen Williams, (EDIT: Dereck Lively, who was younger than Deni was as a rookie), and many more.

Fact is that Deni floundered for his first three years of his career. Nobody to blame but himself, despite whatever excuses you want to make for him. He has now improved into a solid NBA player. But he's nowhere near a star. Success in the NBA is built on superstars, not Deni Avdija's.

Wrong.

There are one, two, or three stars on a team. There are four or five superstar players in the league. You win with Denis.

Derrick White and Jrue Holiday were no better than Deni is now when they were 23.

I could not disagree with you more. The Wizards F'd up trading Deni for what they got.

Sent from my SM-A146U using RealGM mobile app

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

The debate shouldn't be about Deni's progress, rather it should be about where he is, where he is going, his contract and did we get the appropriate value in the trade. The rest is obfuscation...

Deni's progress is on Deni and he had a terrific jump last season. It looks like he will continue to improve into a solid starter. His contract is terrific. We didn't get near to the appropriate value for him.

Exactly.

Not near enough return.

Sent from my SM-A146U using RealGM mobile app

[LyricalRico]

Very hard to compare the Bridges trade and Deni trade. The Knicks were looking for the piece it felt it needed to get them past a team like Boston and they were willing to overpay for a player who over the last few yrs has had sustained success on both ends of the court.

Portland, which is in a similar rebuilding phase as the Zards, was willing to give up 2 FRPs, 2 SRPs and Brogdon for a player who showed marked improvement last season and one that you’d expect to continue to get better. But the small-market Blazers weren’t about to give up for Deni anything close to what the big-market—and contending—Knicks were willing to give up for Bridges.

Bridges was worth that...to the Knicks. Do we have any evidence that other teams made a similar offers? We wouldn't look at Hartenstein's contract and say "well, based on that, Valanciunas should've held out for $15-20M". OKC was in a unique position to do a short-term overpay to try to win a title, while JV seems to have gotten actual market value. Totally different situations, same with the Deni trade IMO.

[nate33]

Very hard to compare the Bridges trade and Deni trade. The Knicks were looking for the piece it felt it needed to get them past a team like Boston and they were willing to overpay for a player who over the last few yrs has had sustained success on both ends of the court.

Portland, which is in a similar rebuilding phase as the Zards, was willing to give up 2 FRPs, 2 SRPs and Brogdon for a player who showed marked improvement last season and one that you’d expect to continue to get better. But the small-market Blazers weren’t about to give up for Deni anything close to what the big-market—and contending—Knicks were willing to give up for Bridges.

Bridges was worth that...to the Knicks. Do we have any evidence that other teams made a similar offers? We wouldn't look at Hartenstein's contract and say "well, based on that, Valanciunas should've held out for $15-20M". OKC was in a unique position to do a short-term overpay to try to win a title, while JV seems to have gotten actual market value. Totally different situations, same with the Deni trade IMO.

Then don't trade him!

[dckingsfan]

Then don't trade him!

I am not sure why this is so hard to grasp... but it is.

If you have an asset for less than what it is worth unless you have to do so. Porzingis is a good example as is Gafford. One could opt out and the other was on an expiring contract. You trade expiring contracts anytime you can (in our situation) for assets.

But with Deni or Kuz, we have time (wait until you get the right offer or don't pull the trigger).

In the case of Deni our FO got ahead of themselves and outplayed themselves by declaring they were going to get an additional first round pick in this draft.

But it is just one mistake in the ugly process of rebuilding. Maybe they will have more success on other fronts. Maybe they will be poor at trading but good at drafting and acquiring FAs (kind of a reverse Tommy if you will).

[DCZards]

Then don't trade him!

I am not sure why this is so hard to grasp... but it is.

If you have an asset for less than what it is worth unless you have to do so. Porzingis is a good example as is Gafford. One could opt out and the other was on an expiring contract. You trade expiring contracts anytime you can (in our situation) for assets.

But with Deni or Kuz, we have time (wait until you get the right offer or don't pull the trigger).

In the case of Deni our FO got ahead of themselves and outplayed themselves by declaring they were going to get an additional first round pick in this draft.

But it is just one mistake in the ugly process of rebuilding. Maybe they will have more success on other fronts. Maybe they will be poor at trading but good at drafting and acquiring FAs (kind of a reverse Tommy if you will).

You may consider it a “mistake” but, in reality, at this point we don’t know for sure whether it was a good or bad trade.

It will depend, in large part, on how much better Deni gets…and how good Carrington becomes and what the Zards do with the other FRP, the two SRPs and Brogdon.

I was not a fan of the Deni trade…but it’s far too early to pass final judgement on it.

[nate33]

Then don't trade him!

I am not sure why this is so hard to grasp... but it is.

If you have an asset for less than what it is worth unless you have to do so. Porzingis is a good example as is Gafford. One could opt out and the other was on an expiring contract. You trade expiring contracts anytime you can (in our situation) for assets.

But with Deni or Kuz, we have time (wait until you get the right offer or don't pull the trigger).

In the case of Deni our FO got ahead of themselves and outplayed themselves by declaring they were going to get an additional first round pick in this draft.

But it is just one mistake in the ugly process of rebuilding. Maybe they will have more success on other fronts. Maybe they will be poor at trading but good at drafting and acquiring FAs (kind of a reverse Tommy if you will).

You may consider it a “mistake” but, in reality, at this point we don’t know for sure whether it was a good or bad trade.

It will depend, in large part, on how much better Deni gets…and how good Carrington becomes and what the Zards do with the other FRP, the two SRPs and Brogdon.

I was not a fan of the Deni trade…but it’s far too early to pass final judgement on it.

Thanks Captain Obvious.

Of course we don't know for sure. There's the small chance that Carrington is much better than Deni, which would make the trade worth it. But we make trades based on the known information at the time. And I'm saying it was an extremely bad bet to trade away an improving 3rd-best-player-on-a-playoff team caliber player for the #14 in a weak draft plus what is likely to be a mid-to-late draft pick in the 2029 draft.