jayjaysee wrote:DowJones wrote:
What premium asset is OKC going to give up for Bridges? For Lauri? For Mobley? That is where you have to start any trade discussion. Piling on these draft picks in the 12-25 range only gets you so far. There needs to be a real premium asset coming back if OKC is going to get a player like Bridges or Lauri.
When did this rule kick in?
Imagine Utah telling Cleveland they can only have Mitchell if they include Garland or Mobley… or.. Ant for Rudy.. Simmons for Butler.. any premier asset for Pascal… I’m sure the list is very long if I didn’t want to be lazy.
We’ve seen multiple superstars/stars traded over the last few years for unknown future picks but for OKC they can’t stack assets?
I wouldn’t compare Mobley to Bridges or Lauri though. Mobley is much more valuable IMO.
If we are talking about actual superstars, sure make Presti pay til it hurts. But Bridges and Lauri are not that and OKC can have the top offer without offering that “premium” asset.. (an LAC first on 2026 or 2027 is pretty premium IMO though..)
Utah blew it up. They also got unprotected first round picks far into the future for 2 franchises (Minnesota and Cleveland) that had a chance to be very high. Those unprotected picks are more valuable to a team trying to rebuild than the 12th pick in a historically weak draft, Josh Giddey, and a 1st round pick of Houston or LAC 2 years from now.
For example, if OKC had the draft rights to Washington's unprotected 2025 pick, that would be high value. If they had unprotected PHX first rounders in 2027 and 2029 like Brooklyn has, that would be high value. How many unprotected first rounders can OKC put on the table from other teams, because their own unprotected first rounders won't hold great value.