Atlanta Hawks Official Trade Ideas Thread (Part 1)

[MaceCase]

I tried Teague for Afflalo over at the Magic board a few days ago. None of those yapping dogs attacked me - you know the yapping dogs who always seem to show up when you visit some other team's board? The ones who are mad you visited? All in all, the proposal was met with agreement or a desire to wait and see about the draft, but there was not a great deal of rejection for the idea. There might be a chance for agreement there. Teague fits well with Oladipo (and ORL's future plans) and Afflalo fits our need, as well. A taller defender at SG has been a need all year.

Play Afflalo over Lou Williams and let the kiddies log some major minutes, anyone?

I've thought the same but also agreed that they'd wait and see on what I presume is Exum and Smart before targeting a PG through trade. Perhaps if they end up going Parker or Wiggins then Harkless might become expendable as well in the trade.

[theatlfan]

I tried Teague for Afflalo over at the Magic board a few days ago. None of those yapping dogs attacked me - you know the yapping dogs who always seem to show up when you visit some other team's board? The ones who are mad you visited? All in all, the proposal was met with agreement or a desire to wait and see about the draft, but there was not a great deal of rejection for the idea. There might be a chance for agreement there. Teague fits well with Oladipo (and ORL's future plans) and Afflalo fits our need, as well. A taller defender at SG has been a need all year.

Play Afflalo over Lou Williams and let the kiddies log some major minutes, anyone?

FYI, Teague has the right to refuse a deal until the off-season. I doubt he'd accept a deal to ORL until then.

Even so, I wouldn't want to do the deal - now or then. The value is fair IMO, but I still think the next step in Ferry's plan is to acquire a piece to build around. Until we're sure we got that piece, I can't see making any deal to reshuffle the deck without getting the more fungible asset. In this deal, we're dealing off a young PG who's about to hit his prime and on a decent contract for an SG who, in 1.5 years, will be a 30 yo looking for a raise in the FA market. Maybe this would make sense in a 3 team deal although that defeats the purpose here...

[parson]

FYI, Teague has the right to refuse a deal until the off-season. I doubt he'd accept a deal to ORL until then.

Even so, I wouldn't want to do the deal - now or then. The value is fair IMO, but I still think the next step in Ferry's plan is to acquire a piece to build around. Until we're sure we got that piece, I can't see making any deal to reshuffle the deck without getting the more fungible asset. In this deal, we're dealing off a young PG who's about to hit his prime and on a decent contract for an SG who, in 1.5 years, will be a 30 yo looking for a raise in the FA market. Maybe this would make sense in a 3 team deal although that defeats the purpose here...

I know Teague can refuse to be traded this year. However, if he's giving up on this team, he might like leaving.

As for aiding or hindering Ferry's plan, the combined salaries of our starting 5 would be less than $33 million (off the top of my head - 12+9.5+2.5+7.5+less than 1), so there's plenty of wiggle room.

[diesel50]

Warriors already have a 2x All Star (Coaches' pick! Well...one commissioner's pick) at the PF position in David Lee and even if you believe Sap to be the best player being swapped that value is extremely diminished going to a team that already holds a comparable player. Perhaps the deal would actually be considerable if you reworked it to include Lee in place of either JO or Bogut. Perhaps Sap, the 1st and shedding a year on Lee's deal minimizes the sting of them losing two young prospects but even then I think they'd walk away but hey, at least not as emphatically.

There's a difference between Sap and Lee. Lee can and has successfully played at the Center position. Sap is nobody's C.

[diesel50]

Am I wrong for Liking Landry Fields?? I know of the contract and the injury... but I would take a chance on him. The guy is a 6'7" guard who can defend and I believe can shoot once he is healthy... so here's the deal.
Depending on a clean bill of health.

Williams for Fields/2nd rounder 2015.
Lou Williams gives them scoring from the 1 position if they trade Lowry or off the bench.
Fields gives us a BIG 2 who can defend and play next to Jeff. As a rookie, this guy shot ~40 from 3 and 55% from 2 while being a good defensive player.

[theatlfan]

I know Teague can refuse to be traded this year. However, if he's giving up on this team, he might like leaving.

As for aiding or hindering Ferry's plan, the combined salaries of our starting 5 would be less than $33 million (off the top of my head - 12+9.5+2.5+7.5+less than 1), so there's plenty of wiggle room.

Not saying he wouldn't accept any trade, just not to a cellar dweller like ORL - at least not without some sort of compensation involved. And if we go to him and he declines, then we'd have estranged him even more...

Sorry, I guess the more appropriate term instead of "fungible" would be tradeable for the most assets. The FA market is only one place to lure a superstar and I wouldn't want to restrict ourselves to just one outlet to lure our piece. I think that, with Teague's age and contract, he'd command a greater return package for longer than Afflalo. If we can trade Teague for Afflalo straight up now, then we can always just do that piece when we're going for the bigger fish. I'd imagine this trade would hold up fairly well for the next 1.5 years (well... unless we could get more for Teague later). After that, we have more unknowns with Afflalo than we have with Teague - Afflalo will be "over the hill" at 30 and an FA who could be looking to command a $10+M long term deal; Teague will be exiting his mid-twenties and signed for 2 more years @ $8M per.

If we had, say, K Love in house already, then I'd think the trade would be a no-brainer, but without that piece, I'd just rather stay younger and more flexible.

[MaceCase]

Warriors already have a 2x All Star (Coaches' pick! Well...one commissioner's pick) at the PF position in David Lee and even if you believe Sap to be the best player being swapped that value is extremely diminished going to a team that already holds a comparable player. Perhaps the deal would actually be considerable if you reworked it to include Lee in place of either JO or Bogut. Perhaps Sap, the 1st and shedding a year on Lee's deal minimizes the sting of them losing two young prospects but even then I think they'd walk away but hey, at least not as emphatically.

There's a difference between Sap and Lee. Lee can and has successfully played at the Center position. Sap is nobody's C.

Lee only played at C under Mike D'Antoni. That is not an endorsement in the least for a player's ability to continue at that position under any other conventional roster. I see no feasible manner in which either the GS GM nor coach feels confident having a 6'8" and 6'9" frontline to compete against the West unless perhaps you think that Don Nelson still holds those positions.

[MaceCase]

I know Teague can refuse to be traded this year. However, if he's giving up on this team, he might like leaving.

As for aiding or hindering Ferry's plan, the combined salaries of our starting 5 would be less than $33 million (off the top of my head - 12+9.5+2.5+7.5+less than 1), so there's plenty of wiggle room.

Not saying he wouldn't accept any trade, just not to a cellar dweller like ORL - at least not without some sort of compensation involved. And if we go to him and he declines, then we'd have estranged him even more...

Sorry, I guess the more appropriate term instead of "fungible" would be tradeable for the most assets. The FA market is only one place to lure a superstar and I wouldn't want to restrict ourselves to just one outlet to lure our piece. I think that, with Teague's age and contract, he'd command a greater return package for longer than Afflalo. If we can trade Teague for Afflalo straight up now, then we can always just do that piece when we're going for the bigger fish. I'd imagine this trade would hold up fairly well for the next 1.5 years (well... unless we could get more for Teague later). After that, we have more unknowns with Afflalo than we have with Teague - Afflalo will be "over the hill" at 30 and an FA who could be looking to command a $10+M long term deal; Teague will be exiting his mid-twenties and signed for 2 more years @ $8M per.

If we had, say, K Love in house already, then I'd think the trade would be a no-brainer, but without that piece, I'd just rather stay younger and more flexible.

I read it in almost the exact opposite. Teague is a George Hill type whom you could justify at that salary or offset at that role and production if you already have a George, Hibbert, Stephenson, Granger etc. on your current roster but you aren't likely to command much for in a trade on his own. He's 25, yes, but I've been burned too often from expecting jumps from our last cadre of youngsters to envision him ironically even taking the jump that Afflalo has taken at 28 especially given what we've witnessed with his mental make-up.

Position scarcity improves Afflalo's value while position abundance decreases Jeffrey's given that we've actually debated here whether or not he's separated himself enough from even his DLeague back-up, Mack. Then as Parsons mentioned it would give the team the opportunity to truly see what they have in Schroeder. Currently, if Schroeder displays competency then the Hawks are faced with a dilemma of how exactly do they unload an average PG making 8 million for the next 3 years in a league chock full of them? With Afflalo you have greater trade prospects due to, as said before, the scarcity of a 2-way player at the 2Guard position and then a shorter contract is always more palatable for a player who will be entering his 30s.

Worst case scenario Afflalo opts out of the last year of his deal looking for a pay raise but that doesn't necessarily mean that the Hawks have to be the one to give it to him. The deal has merit to me as it a) pushes Schroeder up the depth chart b) improves wing rotation which decreases the need to have Louis play so much or rely on a Cartier Martin type c) salary dump to get out of 1-2 years of Jeffrey's deal. d) offers a more flexible trade chip.

Yes, this is not something to consider now due to Jeffrey's trade veto but I would pursue it hard in the summer and let Dennis go into the next season with the full confidence that it's his job to lose.

[lakerhater]

If it were true that Harrison Barnes and Klay Thompson were available, I would easily trade:

Sap, Korver, and our first rounder for Thompson, Barnes, and Bogut.

The reason being is that I believe that Barnes and Thompson have star written all over them. But I don't think they will be with Jackson and Curry in GS.

Lol, GSW would never do that. The W's end up with 2 starting PFs, no starting SGs and the draft pick ends up not being worth much because of what Atl adds to their roster in this deal to finish the season in the weak East.

Here's what GSW ends up with:

Curry/no backup PG
no starting SG/Korver and Crawford
Iguodala/?
Lee/Milsap/Green
no starting C/injured players/Speights

In case you didn't know Green is more of a PF then a SF.

[theatlfan]

One deal I'm kick around now is Teague for Isaiah Thomas + a bad contract from SAC (see the post "More Teams interested in Teague?"). SAC gets some LT breathing room in an off season where they'd be looking to resign Gay and integrating what appears to be a top 5 pick; we get Thomas who can be the immediate vet PG who can fill the role until Schröder is ready then Thomas can transition to Lou's light it up 6th man role in due time. The problem is that there isn't a bad contract over there I'd be remotely interested in taking a flier on. Some options:

Teague for Thomas + Thornton
Thornton just makes a crowded SG position even more crowded. If he could feasibly fill in @ SF even part time, the he'd be more interesting as a reclamation project, but he's only 6'4" in shoes with a 6'5" wingspan so that's really a no go.

Teague for Thomas + Thompson
Thompson's deal is for less $$ but it goes for 3 more years. I don't mind taking on a reclamation project (Thompson has been pretty bad this year), but if things fail then that's a heavy burden to carry for so long.

Teague for Thomas + Outlaw + Derrick Williams
Outlaw is past reclamation stage and would have to be considered $3M in dead $$ next season - even with our SF issues, he's still the best candidate to cut. Williams has finally gotten past the "OMG!! He's a former #2 overall pick!!" stage and more people are seeing him for what he is - a generally neutral to ever so slightly positive player who is completely overpaid even though he's still on his rookie contract. Still, at lead this contract is relatively short.

Personally, the 3rd deal is the one that intrigues me the most. If we're taking a salary dump, then a) I'd prefer it to be for players who can play SF at least part time and b) would prefer taking on dead money for shorter than a bad contract for longer. Even so, I'd still take Thompson and his contract over Thornton who I just see as complete dead weight.

Thoughts?

[ATL Boy]

^ You can scratch off that first option, Nets just traded for Marcus Thornton.

[theatlfan]

^ You can scratch off that first option, Nets just traded for Marcus Thornton.

Actually, keep it on - just exchange Terry for Thornton. The rationale mostly applies too...

[diesel50]

Who would be down for the following:

Teague, Williams, and DMC for Deron Williams?

[parson]

^ What part of fat, breaking down and surly, while scoring 13.4 on .449 with 6.6 assists turns you on? Or is it that we'd get to pay him $19,754,465 for next year, $21,042,800 for 2015-16 and $22,331,135 for 2016-17?

[diesel50]

^ What part of fat, breaking down and surly, while scoring 13.4 on .449 with 6.6 assists turns you on? Or is it that we'd get to pay him $19,754,465 for next year, $21,042,800 for 2015-16 and $22,331,135 for 2016-17?

Right now, Deron is a buy low. Nobody doubts his ability to play the game. He's a multitime allstar. Moreover, this team, FO, and Fanbase has lost all respect for Teague. The trade breaks down to Teague for Deron. Yeah, D-Will's contract is upthere. However, if he's just coming back from injury and we can get him to play some inspired ball, he's the type of guy who can either inspire other stars to come here or who has enough game for us to trade for a package of good players.

[Jamaaliver]

^I, too, was in favor of bringing in Deron for a number of years. But none of his production over the last few years justifies that horrid contract.

[parson]

^ What part of fat, breaking down and surly, while scoring 13.4 on .449 with 6.6 assists turns you on? Or is it that we'd get to pay him $19,754,465 for next year, $21,042,800 for 2015-16 and $22,331,135 for 2016-17?

Right now, Deron is a buy low. Nobody doubts his ability to play the game. He's a multitime allstar. Moreover, this team, FO, and Fanbase has lost all respect for Teague. The trade breaks down to Teague for Deron. Yeah, D-Will's contract is upthere. However, if he's just coming back from injury and we can get him to play some inspired ball, he's the type of guy who can either inspire other stars to come here or who has enough game for us to trade for a package of good players.

You're stretching to praise Williams and stretching to condemn Teague. Don't you see that shows how far into the gray your argument is? "Nobody doubts" Williams' ability to play the game? Really? NOBODY? "...this team, FO, and Fanbase has lost all respect for Teague,"? Really? "has lost ALL respect"?

Considering Williams' fall, we might as well try to sign Bill Russell to play Center.

And how is he going to "inspire" other stars to come here when he's taking up so much of our cap space?

[MaceCase]

Deron is more of a name than a player right now. Sad considering that he's not even 30 yet.

[hege53190]

So from a Bucks perspective, what is Teague's trade value this summer. Would you do just a salary dump? Salary Dump plus a second? Would we need to throw in a future first?

Just trying to gauge his cost.

[ATL Boy]

So from a Bucks perspective, what is Teague's trade value this summer. Would you do just a salary dump? Salary Dump plus a second? Would we need to throw in a future first?

Just trying to gauge his cost.

It definitely won't be just a salary dump, if it was that then we wouldn't have matched him last summer in the first place. I think a mid to late first would have to be given for Teague: he's still young, has been very good (albeit inconsistent at times) and is signed into a team friendly contract which the Bucks themselves gave to him.