Surprised where some of this led...
1st, I have to disagree with what seems to be the consensus in that Adams is more of a backup type guy in the future - that is what he is now as a 20 yo. I still think he could develop (be developed?) into a Andrew Bogut type - elite D in all phases with good-to-very good O who can be a weapon in the PNR game. It might take a year or two, but I could see him settling in as our starting C for the next decade. He's really one of the few prospects currently in the NBA that is playing on a good team who would make me seriously consider trading Horford.
2nd, the 2 TOR trades are very *meh* to me. I'd think we'd want someone with high level potential if we're dealing Horford and a couple of mid-1sts just doesn't hit that standard. Barnes is interesting to me, but nowhere close to that interesting.
hawkschop1 wrote:Al Horford to the lakers for Steve Nash, and filler(s) via sign & trade (i.e. wesley johnson and/or jordan hill), 2014 1st round pick
Have to agree with uga_dawgs24 here: if LAL ends up with a top 3-5 pick, then there's no way they trade it without getting a Durant/LBJ type return.
The more interesting scenario for me is what do they do if they drop into the 6-8 range. The top of the line guys will be off the board and the 2nd tier, while interesting, aren't the type of prospects that satisfy a multi-billion $$ TV deal either. The deal I keep coming back to is Teague for Nash + #6-8. The rationale for LAL is to unload Nash for someone who'd seem a better fit next to Kobe - since Teague can at least play passable D against the opposing PG - and create enough cap room to make a run at LBJ (depends on factors here, but using the standard estimates for cap and reasonable assumptions as to their FA preferences, they could offer him his max after the deal). For us, Nash would hopefully be our veteran bridge to Schröder and Mack, but if he retires then we're paying ~$10M for a top 10 pick.