Official Trade Thread Part XLVII

[pcbothwel]

While the obvious path should be to move whatever Vet expiring (Midds, Smart, CJ, KO) is healthy and has the hot hand, I really want us to retain substantial cap space as possible next summer for 2 reasons.
1) If a team has an interested FA and no cap space, we can outright take on salary and allow them to sign a Luka/KD/Trae/Fox/Porzingis/etc.
2) If Bilal has a bit of a breakout, we can sign him to an extension next summer and front load his salary with our capspace. That would lower his cap hit in 2027+ and give us flexibility with our other extensions or potential FA signings.

[nate33]

2) If Bilal has a bit of a breakout, we can sign him to an extension next summer and front load his salary with our capspace. That would lower his cap hit in 2027+ and give us flexibility with our other extensions or potential FA signings.

Extensions don't work that way. Bilal's 2026-27 salary is already set in stone. If we agreed to an extension in Summer 2026, his 2026-27 salary as dictated by his rookie contract would remain in place and his negotiated extension would kick in after that. Technically, we wouldn't need any cap room to make that extension because we have his Bird Rights.

I think it's very likely that we will frontload Bilal's next contract to the maximum extent possible and give him a declining salary going forward, Deni-style. But that's going to happen whether or not we are significantly under the cap.

[Rafael122]

Would the Pistons trade a first round pick with Fontechio into our TPE? It gives them $25 mil in cap room and the ability to sign NAW, who is rumored to like Detroit and Atlanta.

Didn't they already use a chunk of their TPE to acquire Porzingis?

I could be wrong, but they're so below the tax that Mann/Niang was $23 million out, KP was $30 million in, so all they did was increase their salaries by $7 million. NAW's estimated to get anywhere between $14-$16 million, and Atlanta has 2 large TPEs.

[doclinkin]

I wouldn’t put Tatum on there. Maybe prime Kawhi but no longer. Superstar is an MVP candidate.

Tatum has been All-NBA 1st team in 4 straight years and has won a championship. Yeah, he has never been an actual MVP candidate, but I think that resume qualifies for superstar. I'd actually prefer him over Luka at this point given his consistency and durability (until the Achilles', that is). Tatum isn't as dominant as an offensive hub, but his defensive versatility is crucial to help Boston field such dominating defensive lineups.

Would Kobe or MJ be benched during the Olympics? Curry was briefly, then came back and had his greatest highlight ever.

A superstar is the guy who forces multiple teams not just to game plan against them but to build a roster with stopping them in mind. Forces rules changes. Bends probability in their favor. Takes and makes the last shot no matter the defense against them.

Nobody is scared of Tatum. He’s a very good player but that team won because they assembled a remarkable team, not because Tatum is a raise his game type of player who gets better when the lights are brighter.

[Silvie Lysandra]

They owe it to the fans to stop being ass.

You play to win the game.

If they win 31 games and lose the pick; God-willing if I'm alive and well posting here in July 2026, come back and tell me how foolish I've been.

No, they owe it to the fans to build an actual championship contender. This team has been playing for 41-41 as long as I have been alive. You build an actual contender with smart asset management, and smart asset management is very much not winning 30 games and losing a high draft pick instead of 20 because it's a bigger number. Sure, Indiana, and sure, Denver, but Denver is maxed out and Indiana was looking a tough road back even if Hali didn't go down. Championship winning teams look more like the Warriors, Celtics, Thunder and Spurs, lots of high picks, lots of young talent. The Celtics quite possibly win a second one if not for Tatum's Achilles.

There is no magic that winning 30 games as opposed to 20 has that somehow sets you up for future success compared with how hard tangible assets like higher draft picks do. And I think a lot of the anger at tanking is people realizing that the magical narratives about "winning mentality" or whatever aren't true, and want to punish teams for not conforming to those narratives.

[DCZards]

Would Kobe or MJ be benched during the Olympics? Curry was briefly, then came back and had his greatest highlight ever.

A superstar is the guy who forces multiple teams not just to game plan against them but to build a roster with stopping them in mind. Forces rules changes. Bends probability in their favor. Takes and makes the last shot no matter the defense against them.

Nobody is scared of Tatum. He’s a very good player but that team won because they assembled a remarkable team, not because Tatum is a raise his game type of player who gets better when the lights are brighter.

Tatum’s biggest problem is that he’s not flashy, mouthy or selfish so people have a tendency to overlook just how good he is. He’s a blue-collar kinda guy.

All Tatum does is play the game the right way whether that means being the MAN at crunch time or getting the ball to a teammate like Jaylen Brown instead of forcing a shot against a double team.

Check out Tatum’s numbers from last season and show me how many PFs average almost 27pts, 9 rebs, 6 assists, and a steal.

He's been the best player on an NBA championship team, which also happens to be easily one of the best teams in the NBA over the past 4-5 years. People may not be scared of Tatum but they should be because his team keeps kicking their a**.

And, c'mon doc, how many players are as good as Kobe or MJ? How many players have forced rule changes?

If you want to say he’s not a “superstar” fine…but you clearly underestimate how good Tatum is and his impact on winning.

There’s a reason Tatum has been first team All-NBA for 4 straight seasons…and the #1 option on a championship team.

[payitforward]

Take nothing away from Tatum; he's a tremendous player. But, "superstar" is a term of praise -- what linguists call an "honorific" -- like "beautiful," for example. It doesn't have clear definitional criteria.

[doclinkin]

Would Kobe or MJ be benched during the Olympics? Curry was briefly, then came back and had his greatest highlight ever.

A superstar is the guy who forces multiple teams not just to game plan against them but to build a roster with stopping them in mind. Forces rules changes. Bends probability in their favor. Takes and makes the last shot no matter the defense against them.

Nobody is scared of Tatum. He’s a very good player but that team won because they assembled a remarkable team, not because Tatum is a raise his game type of player who gets better when the lights are brighter.

All Tatum does is play the game the right way whether that means being the MAN at crunch time or getting the ball to a teammate like Jaylen Brown instead of forcing a shot against a double team.

Check out Tatum’s numbers from last season and show me how many PFs average almost 27pts, 9 rebs, 6 assists, and a steal.

He's been the best player on an NBA championship team, which also happens to be easily one of the best teams in the NBA over the past 4-5 years. People may not be scared of Tatum but they should because his team keeps kicking their a**.

And, c'mon doc, how many players are as good as Kobe or MJ? How many players have forced rule changes?

There’s a reason Tatum has been first team All-NBA for 4 straight seasons. Tatum’s biggest problem is that he’s not flashy, mouthy or selfish so people have a tendency to overlook just how good he is.

He’s a fine player. We are talking about the recent champions and whether those teams were carried by a super star.

SGA is an MVP. And even he I have questions if he qualifies. That was a team win. As was the Celts in my opinion. Pistons back in the day. Raptors as a fluke of injuries to superstars. Dallas. The Celts of the Big 3 era. Team wins. They had stars. Not superstars.

Superstars are the MVP types who change the game and team and league around them. With them on your team you have an unfair advantage. A superstar wins by improving the role players around them. Or rendering them irrelevant. Carrying a team if necessary. Forcing teams to load up in roster construction to account for them. I don’t even know that KD qualifies.

Jokic undeniably carries his team, has forced a revival of Bigs and altered scouting to where now we ask if a center has range or can guard outside. Giannis inverted the court with his inhuman length and athleticism, nobody is both long strong and quick enough to guard him. Curry carried us into the small ball era. Making it possible for teams to rely on combo guards for a time. Ushered in the pace and space 3 ball era. LeBron is the most complete basketball player of all time. Shaq forced hack a shaq. MJ and Kobe necessitated that teams search for stoppers or systems. Both revolutionized basketball workouts and training regimens. Magic created the position of a giant point guard. Juiced the uptempo showtime era where teams were forced to run to keep up.

There’s usually not more than 1-2 superstars in the league at any time. Now with the global popularity of the game and with training & longevity and the impossibly sustained excellence of LeBj we are in an era where we’ve had as many 3 or 4.

If you have that player you have a betting odds edge on winning the whole thing. This sort of player has another gear where even when you load up to stop them they find a way to win. Tatum is a fine fine player. Really good at both ends. He’s not bending reality to his will the way the real game changers do.

I would not be startled if he never wins another championship in his career. With a guy like MJ —or even Curry at his peak — you pretty much expected it.

If you had to build a team for a one year run at a championship. Assuming perfect health for the guy you pick. Is Tatum the guy you’d pick #1 overall?

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Coaching malpractice if we’re not a bottom 4 team? I get it, we need that pick next year. We also need to continue to build winning habits. We’re in a tough situation where, assuming the level of play is similar to post ASB, they’re going to be competitive in most games. Factor in the East being weaker and our rookies having more experience. I want everyone to be fully prepared for a 25-30 win season.

I don't care about the 2026 draft or what any of you are saying.

Let the season play out organically.

Put the best players on the floor, using a deep roster, where 10-11 guys play each game.

Rational the playing time according to a meritocracy.

Coach to win each quarter of each game.

Truly let the cream rise.

If the Wizards end up 41-41, you end up trading guys like McCollum, Smart, Olynyk, and KISPERT to teams that are making a push or are offloading contracts.

They owe it to the fans to stop being ass.

You play to win the game.

If they win 31 games and lose the pick; God-willing if I'm alive and well posting here in July 2026, come back and tell me how foolish I've been.

They should do all of this NEXT YEAR. This year, they MUST finish in the bottom 6. I'm not saying we should put together a totally depressing 15-win season. Something like 26 wins should be okay. That's winning every 3rd game, which should be enough to keep morale up.

For the most part I think that's pretty much all this team is capable of anyhow. But if they start getting a little too good in the second half of the season, we might need some mystery injuries to avoid too many wins down the stretch.

Today, if I had to pick a number, I would choose 29 wins. Between 27 and 31 wins.

However, if they make one addition as innocuous as adding a player like Luka Garza or Day'Ron Sharpe, I would say this a 32-win team.

Garza is a bucket.
Sharpe is a rebound.

Neither is light in the cakes.

[doclinkin]

My point is on roster construction. In the ‘2nd apron era’ it is possible to build a one year winner with superior team construction. Good health. Depth. Chemistry.

The superstar in his prime costs a great deal. A slew of assets to acquire and a vulnerability if he goes down with injury.

He also gives you a jumpstart on a championship run. And if you have that guy at his peak production you can probably contend for 2-3 years in a row before it all gets too pricey. But you have a chance.

The Thunder may have created a new model. Of sustainable excellence and unmatched depth. We will see. Recently we have had a series of one and done champs. And I wonder if it is because we don’t yet have that next ascendant superstar dominating the standings. At least not until Wemby grows into his real prime.

[nate33]

My point is on roster construction. In the ‘2nd apron era’ it is possible to build a one year winner with superior team construction. Good health. Depth. Chemistry.

The superstar in his prime costs a great deal. A slew of assets to acquire and a vulnerability if he goes down with injury.

He also gives you a jumpstart on a championship run. And if you have that guy at his peak production you can probably contend for 2-3 years in a row before it all gets too pricey. But you have a chance.

The Thunder may have created a new model. Of sustainable excellence and unmatched depth. We will see. Recently we have had a series of one and done champs. And I wonder if it is because we don’t yet have that next ascendant superstar dominating the standings. At least not until Wemby grows into his real prime.

The Thunder model is not replicable because teams don't generally acquire a young future MVP and a zillion future FRP's for a past-his-peak star like Paul George.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Meh. I believe the Robbins article where he cites front office sources as saying they expect to be in the rebuilding and assessment phase at least until 2028. They are not in a hurry. I bet some urgency is delayed until the new building opens.

This is discouraging.

It's like waiting 2 years to look for the woman of your dreams when she might be at a table nearby, trying to get your attention.

They are locked into a lunkhead lockstep approach if this is true.

"Oh, we're just gonna keep losing. Thank you very much."

I don’t see it that way. We’d be only 2 years into the contract of whomever we draft in 26. We have 5 rookies from last year, plus Bilal, 3 from this year, and at least 2 1sts next year. Plus picks from 27 + 28? What team wins with literally the entire 15 man roster on rookie contracts?

Granted we may ship some. Drop some. But it took 10 years before OKC won a chip. The object is eventual championship. We are building from the ground up. Nobody is saying we tank for 10 years. Just saying realistically it’s going to take time to develop all these players.

Yes they’ve been here for 3 drafts but recall for the Bilal draft this front office was only here like 2 weeks before the draft. So in 2028 they will have only been here 4 years. Show me any team that was contending in 4 years. MJ wasn’t even that quick.

It’s not intentional losing. It’s understanding the timeline. Show me who wins on their rookie contract. Unless we are talking Duncan joining the Admiral.

We will get better, and 26 is the last year of intentional tanking. But even if we get a star in 26 it will take a minute for them to figure it out. You think they’ll win instantly? How.

The best players don’t even start to break out til year 3 or 4. And hit prime at age 26, 27. That’s still 6 years away for Bilal. I’m not saying it’ll take 7 years. I’m saying you’re unrealistic if you think this team will contend for anything quickly even if they draw the #1 overall pick.

I revisited this because a lot of the time, my send works, but my receive buffer is slow. I miss an important idea.

doclinkin, I can't even think of a team with 15 players on rookie deals.

However, I can fathom a rookie deal team winning games. The Fab 5 at Michigan had 3 future 10+ year NBA players.

Alex, Bilal, Bub, Tre, and Will/Kyshawn each seem capable of playing many seasons.

This team SHOULD BE competitive in at most 2 years.

[DCZards]

All Tatum does is play the game the right way whether that means being the MAN at crunch time or getting the ball to a teammate like Jaylen Brown instead of forcing a shot against a double team.

Check out Tatum’s numbers from last season and show me how many PFs average almost 27pts, 9 rebs, 6 assists, and a steal.

He's been the best player on an NBA championship team, which also happens to be easily one of the best teams in the NBA over the past 4-5 years. People may not be scared of Tatum but they should because his team keeps kicking their a**.

And, c'mon doc, how many players are as good as Kobe or MJ? How many players have forced rule changes?

There’s a reason Tatum has been first team All-NBA for 4 straight seasons. Tatum’s biggest problem is that he’s not flashy, mouthy or selfish so people have a tendency to overlook just how good he is.

He’s a fine player. We are talking about the recent champions and whether those teams were carried by a super star.

If you had to build a team for a one year run at a championship. Assuming perfect health for the guy you pick. Is Tatum the guy you’d pick #1 overall?

Fine player? That's some faint praise right there.

"Fine players" do not make 4 straight all-NBA first team. Outstanding players do.

You've somehow managed to escalate the debate to the point where now Tatum has to be the #1 overall pick in the NBA to get the love and props he deserve. No one is saying that he's that guy...but he's clearly one of the best players of his generation.

[nate33]

Would Kobe or MJ be benched during the Olympics? Curry was briefly, then came back and had his greatest highlight ever.

A superstar is the guy who forces multiple teams not just to game plan against them but to build a roster with stopping them in mind. Forces rules changes. Bends probability in their favor. Takes and makes the last shot no matter the defense against them.

Nobody is scared of Tatum. He’s a very good player but that team won because they assembled a remarkable team, not because Tatum is a raise his game type of player who gets better when the lights are brighter.

All Tatum does is play the game the right way whether that means being the MAN at crunch time or getting the ball to a teammate like Jaylen Brown instead of forcing a shot against a double team.

Check out Tatum’s numbers from last season and show me how many PFs average almost 27pts, 9 rebs, 6 assists, and a steal.

He's been the best player on an NBA championship team, which also happens to be easily one of the best teams in the NBA over the past 4-5 years. People may not be scared of Tatum but they should because his team keeps kicking their a**.

And, c'mon doc, how many players are as good as Kobe or MJ? How many players have forced rule changes?

There’s a reason Tatum has been first team All-NBA for 4 straight seasons. Tatum’s biggest problem is that he’s not flashy, mouthy or selfish so people have a tendency to overlook just how good he is.

He’s a fine player. We are talking about the recent champions and whether those teams were carried by a super star.

SGA is an MVP. And even he I have questions if he qualifies. That was a team win. As was the Celts in my opinion. Pistons back in the day. Raptors as a fluke of injuries to superstars. Dallas. The Celts of the Big 3 era. Team wins. They had stars. Not superstars.

Superstars are the MVP types who change the game and team and league around them. With them on your team you have an unfair advantage. A superstar wins by improving the role players around them. Or rendering them irrelevant. Carrying a team if necessary. Forcing teams to load up in roster construction to account for them. I don’t even know that KD qualifies.

Jokic undeniably carries his team, has forced a revival of Bigs and altered scouting to where now we ask if a center has range or can guard outside. Giannis inverted the court with his inhuman length and athleticism, nobody is both long strong and quick enough to guard him. Curry carried us into the small ball era. Making it possible for teams to rely on combo guards for a time. Ushered in the pace and space 3 ball era. LeBron is the most complete basketball player of all time. Shaq forced hack a shaq. MJ and Kobe necessitated that teams search for stoppers or systems. Both revolutionized basketball workouts and training regimens. Magic created the position of a giant point guard. Juiced the uptempo showtime era where teams were forced to run to keep up.

There’s usually not more than 1-2 superstars in the league at any time. Now with the global popularity of the game and with training & longevity and the impossibly sustained excellence of LeBj we are in an era where we’ve had as many 3 or 4.

If you have that player you have a betting odds edge on winning the whole thing. This sort of player has another gear where even when you load up to stop them they find a way to win. Tatum is a fine fine player. Really good at both ends. He’s not bending reality to his will the way the real game changers do.

I would not be startled if he never wins another championship in his career. With a guy like MJ —or even Curry at his peak — you pretty much expected it.

If you had to build a team for a one year run at a championship. Assuming perfect health for the guy you pick. Is Tatum the guy you’d pick #1 overall?

It sounds like we are mostly just disagreeing on definitions, not the extent to which Jayson Tatum is a good player.

I agree completely that Tatum is not in the class of Jordan, Lebron, Shaq, Jokic and Giannis. If your definition of superstar is "top 25 player of all time", then, sure, Tatum does not qualify.

My definition of superstar is a bit more lenient. I think a superstar is a guy who can be the unquestioned best player on a title winning team. And, as a caveat, I'll throw in that that the title run can't be a fluke based on a ton of injuries from the opposition.

By that metric, I'd say there are 5-10 "superstars" in the NBA at any given time. These are all guys that I would unquestioningly pay max money and supermax money without hesitation. I think a guy fails to be a superstar if I'm second guessing a supermax contract. Nobody will blink when SGA gets a supermax extension so he is a superstar. But if you have to pay Jaylen Brown the supermax, you feel kind of sick to your stomach and grudgingly pay it so you don't lose the asset, but you definitely second guess it. Jaylen Brown is not a superstar.

By that definition, I'd say the current superstars are: Jokic, SGA, Giannis, Luka, Wemby, Curry and Tatum. I wouldn't wince paying those guys a supermax (although Curry obviously only on a short term deal given his age). I think Edwards and Haliburton are knocking at the door of superstardom, and guys like Cade may get there eventually.

[AFM]

Superstar isn’t an objective label. More like subjective. If 10 year olds playing pickup say your name when they shoot (“Kobe!”), you’re a superstar. That’s probably the best definition I can think of.

[Gig18]

Superstar isn’t an objective label. More like subjective. If 10 year olds playing pickup say your name when they shoot (“Kobe!”), you’re a superstar. That’s probably the best definition I can think of.

Yeah. One caveat to that. If only 2 to 3 teams are ever shown on TV, the odds of any kids chanting the name of any player not on one of those 2 or 3 teams is reeeeeeemote.
Not sure I ever saw Rick Barry or Buffalo era Bob McAdoo on the toob in their primes. Ahhhh.

[nate33]

Superstar isn’t an objective label. More like subjective. If 10 year olds playing pickup say your name when they shoot (“Kobe!”), you’re a superstar. That’s probably the best definition I can think of.

Yeah. One caveat to that. If only 2 to 3 teams are ever shown on TV, the odds of any kids chanting the name of any player not on one of those 2 or 3 teams is reeeeeeemote.
Not sure I ever saw Rick Barry or Buffalo era Bob McAdoo on the toob in their primes. Ahhhh.

When people see me shoot in pickup games, I get called "Hoiberg". Does that make Fred Hoiberg a superstar?

[payitforward]

Hey! Cut it out, nate -- laughing hurts my shoulder!

[The Consiglieri]

Yeah I don’t believe we’ll be in tank mode through 2027. It sounds like next year there are a handful of kids that could be the top pick, and then couple that with the cap space I think our all in year will be 2026-2027. I hope Ted still has the patience for it and he realizes because of Tommys screw up, you almost have to tank just so that the pick doesn’t convey.

Why? Why would they be all in on '26-'27? We have zero franchise players as of now, 12 month's from essentially the start of the '26-'27. I hear a lot of people making this statement and I really don't get it. If we land Dybantsa, Peterson, or Boozer, that's 1, potentially, but right now, to me, if you're arguing we'll be out of the tanking business in '26-'27, you must believe we have a superstar franchise guy in house. Who is he? Tre?

All in meaning playoff contention, not championship.. This upcoming season will be Year 5. Yeah Winger and Dawkins just got here like 2 years ago but 5 years is more than enough time and I think the goal should have always been 2026-2027 because that's when we actually have full control of our first round picks again.

It's not year 5. Our experience of this misery may be six years in so far and heading to seven (it is, though to be fair, it's about 40 for me, since I started paying attention in '86), but the organization itself did not begin actually addressing the roster problems and need to tank until freaking 2023, two years ago. They just sucked, they weren't actually trying to build anything at all 2018-2022, they were simply retooling: you know this because they refused to trade Beal when everyone with a brain knew they needed to trade Beal, and they kept drafting floor guys like Kispert, Brown, and Hachimura instead of upside swings, even Davis was a floor, aggregated adp pick. There were no moves, none whatsoever, that acknowledged the problem, and set about trying to address it via tear down and rebuild a la 2010 with idiot EG until Shep was fired and replaced two years ago.

We are two years in. Unless we land a stud in '26, we will be drafting very very high again in '27, period. I don't know how high, it wouldn't surprise me if just having a bunch of solid to good youngsters means we improve to 30 or 35 wins, instead of the 20-25 that I'd expect if we end up with slot 5-7 a year from now, but there's no question, if we get hosed in the lottery next May, we will be a lottery team again, almost certainly a top 1-10 team in '27. I don't know if people get this, I tend to think they don't.

Our feelings don't matter, Ted's do, I'll admit, frustrating as it is, but the reality is their plan looks like a 5 year plan ('23-'28) more than a 3 year plan, and the reporting that they will be giving the kiddos through '27 or '28 for full evals tells you as much.

The tank isn't done, and lottery zone picking is probably in play through '27 at minimum, getting hosed in this lottery insured that, even if Tre is even better than expected by his biggest fans.

I wouldn't guarantee when it stops, or when they start just playing, rather than tanking, but still earning lottery picks (it may just be '27 that that happens after all), but if I were to put odds on it:

Tanking ends with start of '26-'27 if we hit on a stud early: 35%
Tanking ends with start of '26-'27 if we get hosed again: 10-15%

Let me put it this way...if we get luck in '26, I think we crest 40 wins in '27-'28
if we don't get lucky in '26, I think at best, we crest 40 wins in '27-'28, more likely '28-'29.

I think everything depends on Tre's development, and the Hail Mary upside of Sarr/Bub/Bilal/AJ (does any of those guys make a crazy leap in '25 or '26 or '27) and if we get lucky in the lottery in '26/pick the right guy too (Dybanta/Peterson and to a lesser extent Boozer I would view as really lucky, I don't know Ament yet, but I know people are super excited with what he did during his last year in high school. But yeah, it's a lot of moving parts and with no franchise players yet, I am running under the perception that we try to start winning probably summer '27, I really, really don't think the tank is over, barring tremendous things happening all over the place in the next 13 months.

[AFM]

They were yelling Hindenburg, aka oh the humanity