SAS - Sacramento - Dallas

[jowglenn]

I can't imagine the Spurs fans going for this.

Why? It makes them contenders.

Let's just say the last team that traded a young up-and-coming point guard for Domantas Sabonis regretted it.

[BlazersBroncos]

I can see this w/ Vassell + 15.

I dont think Sabonis has Castle + Vassell value.

[The-Power]

Isn't there an argument when you have arguably the best defender in the game that you can afford to sacrifice a little defense for offense at the center position?

That best defenders is their Center, though. I understand the idea of having Victor be paired with a Center, and perhaps the Spurs will explore that at some point, but as it stands Victor is their Center. And after that utter fiasco that was Victor next to Zach Collins, I wouldn't risk doing a high-value trade that brings in a Center if I were the Spurs. There are safer and cheaper options to explore whether Victor can thrive at the 4.

I also never understood the argument of sacrificing some of what you are good to improve in other areas. If I lose some defense to add some offense, I am still the same quality team overall. What matters is improving in talent and creating additional synergies. Of course we can debate whether this would be the case here and ultimately come to the conclusion that the trade is worth it. But it wouldn't simply be because a team like SAS can afford to weaken their defense in return for offense any more than any other team can.

[parsnips33]

Isn't there an argument when you have arguably the best defender in the game that you can afford to sacrifice a little defense for offense at the center position?

That best defenders is their Center, though. I understand the idea of having Victor be paired with a Center, and perhaps the Spurs will explore that at some point, but as it stands Victor is their Center. And after that utter fiasco that was Victor next to Zach Collins, I wouldn't risk doing a high-value trade that brings in a Center if I were the Spurs. There are safer and cheaper options to explore whether Victor can thrive at the 4.

I also never understood the argument of sacrificing some of what you are good to improve in other areas. If I lose some defense to add some offense, I am still the same quality team overall. What matters is improving in talent and creating additional synergies. Of course we can debate whether this would be the case here and ultimately come to the conclusion that the trade is worth it. But it wouldn't simply be because a team like SAS can afford to weaken their defense in return for offense any more than any other team can.

Yeah if Vic is essentially a full time center and you only move him to the 4 in certain matchups, probably no need to overly invest in that position.

And yeah I think you bring up a good point in synergy, you are trying to be more than the sum of your parts. But if conventional team building says you want to have floor spacing wings, but you have the best shooter/motion shooter in history, you can afford to prioritize defense/playmaking over shooting at the forward spots. If Wemby is a Steph level outlier on defense, you probably want to try to find his Offensive Draymond, whoever that might be. I'm not saying Sabonis is that guy or you need to get him, but you can stray a little farther from conventional roster building tenets when you've got a freak

[wemby]

Isn't there an argument when you have arguably the best defender in the game that you can afford to sacrifice a little defense for offense at the center position?

That best defenders is their Center, though. I understand the idea of having Victor be paired with a Center, and perhaps the Spurs will explore that at some point, but as it stands Victor is their Center. And after that utter fiasco that was Victor next to Zach Collins, I wouldn't risk doing a high-value trade that brings in a Center if I were the Spurs. There are safer and cheaper options to explore whether Victor can thrive at the 4.

You can make a case on offense, but Wemby's competitive advantage on defense comes from playing close to the basket, that makes it very difficult to envision him playing effectively alongside another center who can't defend on the perimeter, as any perceived gains on one end would be negated on the other. That is why I'm not high on trading for Vucevic, Sabonis, or any other center, I'd much prefer another big forward who can defend the perimiter, rebound, and space the floor. Not an easy task, but no point in overpaying for bad fits.

[One_and_Done]

I can't imagine the Spurs fans going for this.

Agreed. Sabonis is a bench player for them, because he can really only play at the 5 and the Spurs know Wemby has to play that position. Some other team is a better suitor for the flawed Sabonis.

[wemby]

TBH, I would rather ask the Mavs for Gafford's price tag, much more reasonable target.

Issue here is Dallas doesn't want to part him out. Then you get to value. He has one year left and he's either a below average starter or great bench big. Which makes his trade value relatively small. Dallas benefits more from him on court than trading him for 4 2nds or whatever he is worth.

Now if the Spurs have a useful player they are willing to move, or can route their futures to a 3rd team that would rather have than than Gafford, maybe.

But hard to see a deal, because he's worth more on court than in trade and Dallas is in win now mode, even if they aren't very good.

Mavs can't reasonably have 3 centers on their roster to start next season, not if they want to contend, not without Kyrie. They have 2 options: move Gafford or move Lively. The former allows them to keep their best long term prospect at center, the latter allows them to maximize their return. If Mavs opt to move Gafford then Spurs have the assets to put a fair offer, but I will concede that Nico Harrison's handling of the Luka trade suggests he targets whomever he wants and isn't likely to be wooed with assets. I don't think it's likely, but I'd definitely pick up the phone and ask about Gafford if I were the Spurs.

[jayjaysee]

TBH, I would rather ask the Mavs for Gafford's price tag, much more reasonable target.

Issue here is Dallas doesn't want to part him out. Then you get to value. He has one year left and he's either a below average starter or great bench big. Which makes his trade value relatively small. Dallas benefits more from him on court than trading him for 4 2nds or whatever he is worth.

Now if the Spurs have a useful player they are willing to move, or can route their futures to a 3rd team that would rather have than than Gafford, maybe.

But hard to see a deal, because he's worth more on court than in trade and Dallas is in win now mode, even if they aren't very good.

Mavs can't reasonably have 3 centers on their roster to start next season, not if they want to contend, not without Kyrie. They have 2 options: move Gafford or move Lively. The former allows them to keep their best long term prospect at center, the latter allows them to maximize their return. If Mavs opt to move Gafford then Spurs have the assets to put a fair offer, but I will concede that Nico Harrison's handling of the Luka trade suggests he targets whomever he wants and isn't likely to be wooed with assets. I don't think it's likely, but I'd definitely pick up the phone and ask about Gafford if I were the Spurs.

As a starting leg in a three team trade.. (no idea on value*)

Julian and Branham for Gafford and Martin (into MLE)

Is that roughly fair? Does it have to be Naji and not Martin? Does Dallas or SAS owe value?

The third team would end up with Branham and whatever Dallas salary/assets, while getting the extra cap spacing thanks to SA?

Without a third team it doesn’t really work.

And if the third team player is a wing, I think you can keep Julian out of it and include Wesley to accomplish mostly the same goal?

A different flip if Julian is valued higher than I think he should be..

Gafford, Martin (into MLE) and the LAL pick with say top 6 protection (roll over to Dallas 2020?) for Branham and the 2025 Atlanta pick.

Delay the trade for the Atl pick to count as matching salary..

No idea what the third team player is, but assume there’s a wide range of players you can input where their team gets 1-2 firsts and trims 15-20 mil in year one..