RealGM

Insipired by the Luka for 3 #1 picks thread, I was wondering how many #1 picks in the next 10 years would be enough for you to pass on having Giannis for 5 years (1 year on current contract, 4 years on his supermax contract that he'll be able to sign next year).

The question&the poll is a bit differently formulated from that in the Luka thread, especially since Giannis is an interesting case considering he might still develop a reliable outside (shooting) game, but he might also not (he'll turn 26 next month), and his contract is&will be much higher than Luka's, leaving you with less cap space to build around him.

You never make that trade even for 10 number one picks unless a LeBron is available.

2021 #1 Overall pick + 2022 #1 overall picks will do it for me, if the rules change and Emoni Bates is eligible for 2022, Cade Cunningham and Emoni Bates both look to be elite prospects. Maybe throw in Bronny in 2024 for good measure.

Cunningham looks to be star bound, his current comparison is a 6'7" far better shooting version of Ben Simmons, he also has a nearly 7ft wingspan, star in the making. Emoni is only 16 but he's already a 6'8.5" forward with guard like scoring/ball handling like a true in-between of Brandon Ingram and Kevin Durant type of prospect, plus since he is still only 16 I'd guess theirs a good chance he winds up in the 6'10-6'11" range.

Either one of these guys would be the #1 pick this year already, if some how Milwaukee were to be able to trade Giannis for the draft rights Of these two guys I think they would pull the trigger. I know the question is supposing if you had 5 years of Giannis but Milwaukee only has 1 year guaranteed, and as a neutral observer I don't think they have a real shot at keeping him long term.

Giannis is a great player, obviously but I think he would be best served playing a role like Anthony Davis did on the Lakers this year, learning to be a touch more of an off-ball player with a true offensive maestro like Luka, Steph, or even maybe CP3 being the main trigger man.

Giannis as the main guy reminds me a bit more like an over-sized Russell Westbrook then a LeBron. I don't want to come off as being a Giannis hater though, I could easily see him propelling his game on a better team like Toronto or Miami as the true number #1 guy flanked by great supporting stars like Butler/Bam or Pascal/Lowry.

Give me Victor Wembanyama and 30+mill of cap space and I'm good thanks cuz

Looking at the history of #1 overall picks in the last quarter century, you're much more likely to get a Bargnani/Bennett/Brown than you are to get a Bron.

From that list, there's maybe 5 of the 25 who I'd trade Giannis for, (AI, Duncan, Yao, James, Davis), and maybe a small handful of others if I'm being charitable or praying for potential.

There's nothing to suggest that the next decade of First overalls is going to be better than the past quarter century.

Parataxis, you must take into account the possibility that your franchise would in the past, even without hindsight, select someone else as the #1 pick, for example Dončić instead of Ayton (as many had Luka #1 on their Big Boards).

Pootbrah, I'm really worried about Victor's frame, especially durabilty/injury proneness once he starts to put on bulk. But yeah, I'm excited to see him play.

Chitownsalesmen, thanks for the detailed reply, I see we're both similarly waiting to see if Giannis makes that last step to become a true #1 offensive option on a championship team. I really hope he develops a good shot...

Bk_2020, if 10 isn't enough, how many would be enough for you to make that trade?

2 to 3 is the right answer depending on the expected prospects being available in those drafts.

You can trade five number 1 picks in this year's type of draft but only like 2 in the draft the year before.

LukaV wrote:Parataxis, you must take into account the possibility that your franchise would in the past, even without hindsight, select someone else as the #1 pick, for example Dončić instead of Ayton (as many had Luka #1 on their Big Boards).

Sure, but it's also possible that we'd select somebody worse. So that's a wash either way.

Parataxis wrote:

LukaV wrote:Parataxis, you must take into account the possibility that your franchise would in the past, even without hindsight, select someone else as the #1 pick, for example Dončić instead of Ayton (as many had Luka #1 on their Big Boards).

Sure, but it's also possible that we'd select somebody worse. So that's a wash either way.

That's true, you're right. But I imagine most of us are thinking our front office is better than the front offices of teams that regularly pick at the top of the draft, so that on average you'll pick better #1 picks than most teams in the past?

The supermax is enough to cripple a team going forward, I'd much rather he gets traded now like Kawhi tbh.

We could get two years of no fans in seats, so that's half your revenue gone.

LukaV wrote:

Parataxis wrote:

LukaV wrote:Parataxis, you must take into account the possibility that your franchise would in the past, even without hindsight, select someone else as the #1 pick, for example Dončić instead of Ayton (as many had Luka #1 on their Big Boards).

Sure, but it's also possible that we'd select somebody worse. So that's a wash either way.

That's true, you're right. But I imagine most of us are thinking our front office is better than the front offices of teams that regularly pick at the top of the draft, so that on average you'll pick better #1 picks than most teams in the past?

But this is either the Buck's FO specifically (since they're the one with Giannis) or just an NBA average FO in general, if it's just a hypothetical. ESPECIALLY looking 10 years into the future - who knows who will be in that FO at the time?


There's no reason to believe that any given first overall is going to be better than the average quality of a historic first overall. The variance is part of the decision-making when getting a draft pick. The average NBA FO is exactly as good as the average NBA FO.

And if you're assuming that they're all going to be LeBron-esque, then you're asking a VERY different question. Because of course you'd trade years 1-7 of Lebron for years 8-12 of Giannis. Of course.

Cade Cunningham alone next year > Yawnis

Parataxis, good points!