Wolves | Magic | Spurs

[rugbyrugger23]

Magic fans here we go again, I love the punishment...

Assumptions are this trade is closer to deadline. Magic win-now has not imploded but playoffs are not in sight. SAS as usual is hanging around that 7-8 playoff spot. Wolves are not in but not fully out —purgatory in the West.

Magic Trade: A. Gordon + DJ
Magic Receive: Culver + Teague + 2020 Spurs 1st (protected)

Spurs Trade: Murray + Mills + 2020 1st
Spurs Receive: Covington + DJ + Wolves SRP

Wolves Trade: Covington + Culver + Teague + SRP
Wolves Receive: A. Gordon + Murray + Mills

Magic Why: yes, they are going younger (even though Teague is a vet). But they get a SG youth to add to core — put PG on their 2020 draft shopping list (assuming Fultz is Fultz) and they have a solid-well-rounded-core. A. Gordon for Culver and a 1st is more than fair value.

Spurs Why: Covington added to core for a Pops playoff push. White gets full vote of confidence as PGOF for Spurs.

Wolves Why: they trade for 2 players perfect age to be long term fixtures with Towns — but who are proven and ready to become a big 3 core of the North.
C: Towns
F: Gordon
F: Wiggins
G: Okogie | Wiggins
G: Murray
2020 offseason when Mills and Dieng are expiring contracts, Wolves could be a consolidation trade away from cementing their new core around Towns (Okogie + 2020 Lotto + FFRP as needed).

[Ducklett]

Magic fans here we go again, I love the punishment...

Assumptions are this trade is closer to deadline. Magic win-now has not imploded but playoffs are not in sight. SAS as usual is hanging around that 7-8 playoff spot. Wolves are not in but not fully out —purgatory in the West.

Magic Trade: A. Gordon + DJ
Magic Receive: Culver + Teague + 2020 Spurs 1st (protected)

Spurs Trade: Murray + Mills + 2020 1st
Spurs Receive: Covington + DJ + Wolves SRP

Wolves Trade: Covington + Culver + Teague + SRP
Wolves Receive: A. Gordon + Murray + Mills

Magic Why: yes, they are going younger (even though Teague is a vet). But they get a SG youth to add to core — put PG on their 2020 draft shopping list (assuming Fultz is Fultz) and they have a solid-well-rounded-core. A. Gordon for Culver and a 1st is more than fair value.

Spurs Why: Covington added to core for a Pops playoff push. White gets full vote of confidence as PGOF for Spurs.

Wolves Why: they trade for 2 players perfect age to be long term fixtures with Towns — but who are proven and ready to become a big 3 core of the North.
C: Towns
F: Gordon
F: Wiggins
G: Okogie | Wiggins
G: Murray
2020 offseason when Mills and Dieng are expiring contracts, Wolves could be a consultation trade away from cementing their new core around Towns (Okogie + 2020 Lotto + FFRP as needed).

There is way too many assumptions in this trade but I am willing to play along. First things first: if the Magic aren't in sight of playoffs, it will be a total implosion and that means tanking. That means trading everything that isn't Fultz/Isaac/Bamba/Okeke. If we are trading AG and DJ (who at this point would be a decent player to trade to a playoff team), it needs to be for a full gambit of draft picks and maybe bad salary for more picks. While this trade is average for the Magic (I don't like protection on the Spurs pick), Teague is not something the Magic would want and Culver is total question marks.

[giberish]

Magic fans here we go again, I love the punishment...

Assumptions are this trade is closer to deadline. Magic win-now has not imploded but playoffs are not in sight. SAS as usual is hanging around that 7-8 playoff spot. Wolves are not in but not fully out —purgatory in the West.

Magic Trade: A. Gordon + DJ
Magic Receive: Culver + Teague + 2020 Spurs 1st (protected)

Spurs Trade: Murray + Mills + 2020 1st
Spurs Receive: Covington + DJ + Wolves SRP

Wolves Trade: Covington + Culver + Teague + SRP
Wolves Receive: A. Gordon + Murray + Mills

Magic Why: yes, they are going younger (even though Teague is a vet). But they get a SG youth to add to core — put PG on their 2020 draft shopping list (assuming Fultz is Fultz) and they have a solid-well-rounded-core. A. Gordon for Culver and a 1st is more than fair value.

Spurs Why: Covington added to core for a Pops playoff push. White gets full vote of confidence as PGOF for Spurs.

Wolves Why: they trade for 2 players perfect age to be long term fixtures with Towns — but who are proven and ready to become a big 3 core of the North.
C: Towns
F: Gordon
F: Wiggins
G: Okogie | Wiggins
G: Murray
2020 offseason when Mills and Dieng are expiring contracts, Wolves could be a consultation trade away from cementing their new core around Towns (Okogie + 2020 Lotto + FFRP as needed).

There is way too many assumptions in this trade but I am willing to play along. First things first: if the Magic aren't in sight of playoffs, it will be a total implosion and that means tanking. That means trading everything that isn't Fultz/Isaac/Bamba/Okeke. If we are trading AG and DJ (who at this point would be a decent player to trade to a playoff team), it needs to be for a full gambit of draft picks and maybe bad salary for more picks. While this trade is average for the Magic (I don't like protection on the Spurs pick), Teague is not something the Magic would want and Culver is total question marks.

Teague is just salary/position/roster spot matching, he's not the value.

Culver is an incoming rookie. You say he's a total question mark - but draft picks are even bigger question marks? Isn't that exactly what you say you'd want under these conditions?

And really, Culver seems like much better rebuild value then a couple late/distant 1sts. Though obviously his value will change based on how he looks for the first half of the year - which makes evaluating this sort of deal impossible at this point.

[azwfan]

Seems light to me from the Magic POV.
Note: I am not high on Culver, so that may be why i think its light. A protected pick from the spurs does not seem very valuable to me. So yeah, seems super light for the Magic. I guess I like Gordon and not big on Culver (as opposed to consensus RealGM opinion?).

Love Murray for the Twolves. I feel like if they can change this trade around to get just Murray and hold on to Covington - that would be more ideal.

No idea for the Spurs. They always seem to come up with something to be competitive and I got no clue what direction they are headed. But I think Murray would make sense for the Magic also. (If they're out of the playoff hunt) Maybe something like Ross for Mills and Murray?

[Chinook]

I'm not against trading Murray, and I think something like this could make sense. It gives the Spurs more 2021 cap space than they might have if they otherwise re-signed DJM this summer. There will be at least one Spurs fan who probably disagrees with me on this though and wouldn't want to move DeJounte if DeRozan or probably anyone else on the roster could be moved instead.

White, Augustine, Forbes
DeRozan, Walker, Belinelli
Covington, Carroll, Johnson
Gay, Samanic, Metu
Aldridge, Poeltl, Lyles

The lineup has more two-way potential than it did last year. It's still a shame that Morris backed out of his deal with SA, because having him, Cov and White as starters and Carroll and Poeltl on the bench would make for a terrific defensive foundation without compromising the offense.

[Chinook]

But I think Murray would make sense for the Magic also. (If they're out of the playoff hunt) Maybe something like Ross for Mills and Murray?

I think the Spurs would and should think this is a really bad trade idea. Ross isn't nearly as desirable as Covington, so I have no idea why they'd give up their favorite (not their best in my opinion but the one the FO and coaching staff seems to hype up the most) prospect for a guy like Ross. It doesn't make any sense without the Magic paying a whole lot for Murray. Terrance himself isn't any incentive to do this.

[Ducklett]

Magic fans here we go again, I love the punishment...

Assumptions are this trade is closer to deadline. Magic win-now has not imploded but playoffs are not in sight. SAS as usual is hanging around that 7-8 playoff spot. Wolves are not in but not fully out —purgatory in the West.

Magic Trade: A. Gordon + DJ
Magic Receive: Culver + Teague + 2020 Spurs 1st (protected)

Spurs Trade: Murray + Mills + 2020 1st
Spurs Receive: Covington + DJ + Wolves SRP

Wolves Trade: Covington + Culver + Teague + SRP
Wolves Receive: A. Gordon + Murray + Mills

Magic Why: yes, they are going younger (even though Teague is a vet). But they get a SG youth to add to core — put PG on their 2020 draft shopping list (assuming Fultz is Fultz) and they have a solid-well-rounded-core. A. Gordon for Culver and a 1st is more than fair value.

Spurs Why: Covington added to core for a Pops playoff push. White gets full vote of confidence as PGOF for Spurs.

Wolves Why: they trade for 2 players perfect age to be long term fixtures with Towns — but who are proven and ready to become a big 3 core of the North.
C: Towns
F: Gordon
F: Wiggins
G: Okogie | Wiggins
G: Murray
2020 offseason when Mills and Dieng are expiring contracts, Wolves could be a consultation trade away from cementing their new core around Towns (Okogie + 2020 Lotto + FFRP as needed).

There is way too many assumptions in this trade but I am willing to play along. First things first: if the Magic aren't in sight of playoffs, it will be a total implosion and that means tanking. That means trading everything that isn't Fultz/Isaac/Bamba/Okeke. If we are trading AG and DJ (who at this point would be a decent player to trade to a playoff team), it needs to be for a full gambit of draft picks and maybe bad salary for more picks. While this trade is average for the Magic (I don't like protection on the Spurs pick), Teague is not something the Magic would want and Culver is total question marks.

Teague is just salary/position/roster spot matching, he's not the value.

Culver is an incoming rookie. You say he's a total question mark - but draft picks are even bigger question marks? Isn't that exactly what you say you'd want under these conditions?

And really, Culver seems like much better rebuild value then a couple late/distant 1sts. Though obviously his value will change based on how he looks for the first half of the year - which makes evaluating this sort of deal impossible at this point.

That is fair. I should have been much more clear on my "Culver is question marks" statement. Seeing at this deal would be at some point in the season that the Magic are "out of the playoffs", we would have data on Culver. Since we don't have the data, his value would be completely unknown to us at this point.

[rugbyrugger23]

Seems light to me from the Magic POV.
Note: I am not high on Culver, so that may be why i think its light. A protected pick from the spurs does not seem very valuable to me. So yeah, seems super light for the Magic. I guess I like Gordon and not big on Culver (as opposed to consensus RealGM opinion?).

Love Murray for the Twolves. I feel like if they can change this trade around to get just Murray and hold on to Covington - that would be more ideal.

No idea for the Spurs. They always seem to come up with something to be competitive and I got no clue what direction they are headed. But I think Murray would make sense for the Magic also. (If they're out of the playoff hunt) Maybe something like Ross for Mills and Murray?

You can’t really think that is fair value?

Murray to Magic could work, just not ideal with him about to be paid, and not that 23/24 is old by any means, just not as ideal as full rookie contracts and draft picks with where this trade takes them.

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.

[Mykhyn]

I'm not against trading Murray, and I think something like this could make sense. It gives the Spurs more 2021 cap space than they might have if they otherwise re-signed DJM this summer. There will be at least one Spurs fan who probably disagrees with me on this though and wouldn't want to move DeJounte if DeRozan or probably anyone else on the roster could be moved instead.

White, Augustine, Forbes
DeRozan, Walker, Belinelli
Covington, Carroll, Johnson
Gay, Samanic, Metu
Aldridge, Poeltl, Lyles

The lineup has more two-way potential than it did last year. It's still a shame that Morris backed out of his deal with SA, because having him, Cov and White as starters and Carroll and Poeltl on the bench would make for a terrific defensive foundation without compromising the offense.

Hard to argue against that lineup but I'd have such a hard time agreeing to trade Dejounte. Much rather trade White

[MoneyTalks41890]

I think it's a pretty good idea all the way around.

[Magic_Johnny12]

So let me get this right playoffs are not in sight for Orlando so in reality we'll be tanking and this prompts us to trade one of our best/youngest promising players? Furthermore, trade him for a rookie that certainly wouldn't play in front of either Fournier or Ross. This essentially would be worse then drafting Bamba while still having Vucevic.

Not sure how many times us Orlando fans have to say it for people to believe, but we do not want nor need to get "younger" and we do not want to go backwards even in this hypothetical situation. So if we're trading Gordon, we're trading him for a star-ish player that could immediately produce.

Culver + a FRP might be okay value for Gordon in a nutshell, but it's not the direction Orlando is going in. I see them having more interest in Covington than Culver with all things considered.

Also I think it's wayyyy too favorable for SAS. Murray has proved nothing (even when he started) and is coming off a season ending injury and is on a contract year. Unless he comes out looking like the next Penny Hardaway I see no world where he carries such value.

[21 TD]

I'm not against trading Murray, and I think something like this could make sense. It gives the Spurs more 2021 cap space than they might have if they otherwise re-signed DJM this summer. There will be at least one Spurs fan who probably disagrees with me on this though and wouldn't want to move DeJounte if DeRozan or probably anyone else on the roster could be moved instead.

White, Augustine, Forbes
DeRozan, Walker, Belinelli
Covington, Carroll, Johnson
Gay, Samanic, Metu
Aldridge, Poeltl, Lyles

The lineup has more two-way potential than it did last year. It's still a shame that Morris backed out of his deal with SA, because having him, Cov and White as starters and Carroll and Poeltl on the bench would make for a terrific defensive foundation without compromising the offense.

Non Spurs fans don't get the infatuation the organization has with Mills. There's not a chance they'd trade him for anything that's realistic.

The return isn't bad (though Covington's health is sketchy) and I'm not as sold on Murray as many, but I would like to wait at least a year to get a better sense of his upside before seriously considering a trade like this.

No e on Augustin, Forbes backup SG, Belinelli/Walker backup SF, Carroll backup PF, Lyles third PF, Metu third C.

[tiderulz]

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.

until we see Culver play, we have no idea if that is fair value or not. Just because he was a high pick doesnt mean he turns out well. Josh JAckson was a high pick and he is worth next to nothing now.

[rugbyrugger23]

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.

until we see Culver play, we have no idea if that is fair value or not. Just because he was a high pick doesnt mean he turns out well. Josh JAckson was a high pick and he is worth next to nothing now.

You know that is not a fair response. You can say that about every draft pick and hence no draft pick would be worth any value.

And on the flip side, I could equally say that the high draft pick has more value than Gordon who has not on rookie deal, is what he is (floor/ceiling/peak), used up his rookie contract, and more.

Your response and mine above are just playing to your side of which ever agenda you want to push.

[tiderulz]

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.

until we see Culver play, we have no idea if that is fair value or not. Just because he was a high pick doesnt mean he turns out well. Josh JAckson was a high pick and he is worth next to nothing now.

You know that is not a fair response. You can say that about every draft pick and hence no draft pick would be worth any value.

And on the flip side, I could equally say that the high draft pick has more value than Gordon who has not on rookie deal, is what he is (floor/ceiling/peak), used up his rookie contract, and more.

Your response and mine above are just playing to your side of which ever agenda you want to push.

how is that not a fair response? We know exactly what Gordon is right now. We know he has a track record of getting better every year. Now, that track record could end this past year and he could only be the same as he is now, but we know what he is. We have no idea what Culver is, he could be very good, he could be like Jackson, NTkilina, Chriss, Bender, Okafor, HEzonja, etc, of high draft picks that didnt turn out well. So you cant use an absolute and say that Culver + mid-to-late first is fair value for AG.

[azwfan]

Seems light to me from the Magic POV.
Note: I am not high on Culver, so that may be why i think its light. A protected pick from the spurs does not seem very valuable to me. So yeah, seems super light for the Magic. I guess I like Gordon and not big on Culver (as opposed to consensus RealGM opinion?).

Love Murray for the Twolves. I feel like if they can change this trade around to get just Murray and hold on to Covington - that would be more ideal.

No idea for the Spurs. They always seem to come up with something to be competitive and I got no clue what direction they are headed. But I think Murray would make sense for the Magic also. (If they're out of the playoff hunt) Maybe something like Ross for Mills and Murray?

You can’t really think that is fair value?

Murray to Magic could work, just not ideal with him about to be paid, and not that 23/24 is old by any means, just not as ideal as full rookie contracts and draft picks with where this trade takes them.

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.

You may think Culver and #17 (which is almost the best case scenario) for Gordon is good value... but i don't. I find it terrible value. Unless AG got injured and I wasn't aware? Or demanded to be traded? I'd rather have Gordon by a considerable amount. Mid to late 1sts and unproven rookies in a flat & weak draft class don't exactly jump start a rebuild effort.

Additionally, I still can't figure out why the Magic would want to trade 23 yo Gordon even if they aren't making the playoffs. If the Magic are going to be tearing down and starting over, its going to be Ross, Vucevic, and Fournier that are dealt. Gordon is kept or dealt for a better fit or packaged with other assets for an available star.

If in 6 months Culver looks like a really nice player - then it may look better, but at this point... its really quite a bit off.

[rugbyrugger23]

until we see Culver play, we have no idea if that is fair value or not. Just because he was a high pick doesnt mean he turns out well. Josh JAckson was a high pick and he is worth next to nothing now.

You know that is not a fair response. You can say that about every draft pick and hence no draft pick would be worth any value.

And on the flip side, I could equally say that the high draft pick has more value than Gordon who has not on rookie deal, is what he is (floor/ceiling/peak), used up his rookie contract, and more.

Your response and mine above are just playing to your side of which ever agenda you want to push.

how is that not a fair response? We know exactly what Gordon is right now. We know he has a track record of getting better every year. Now, that track record could end this past year and he could only be the same as he is now, but we know what he is. We have no idea what Culver is, he could be very good, he could be like Jackson, NTkilina, Chriss, Bender, Okafor, HEzonja, etc, of high draft picks that didnt turn out well. So you cant use an absolute and say that Culver + mid-to-late first is fair value for AG.

Why are any draft picks ever traded for proven players (being Gordon or otherwise)? Because they have value despite not playing an NBA Minute. GMs make the trade on speculation and potential. They know better than you that every player without playing a NBA Minute could be a bust, mediocre, above average, great, or superstar. Just because they will end up somewhere on that spectrum, but yet to find their landing spot on that spectrum (vs. the player they are dealing — in this case Gordon) trades for draft picks are done all the time.

An extreme representation of this is Zion. He probably is the most valued assets/draft pick of all NBA players 23 and younger. And he hasn’t played an NBA Minute.

This post seems like common knowledge and not sure why it needs to be discussed.

[rugbyrugger23]

Seems light to me from the Magic POV.
Note: I am not high on Culver, so that may be why i think its light. A protected pick from the spurs does not seem very valuable to me. So yeah, seems super light for the Magic. I guess I like Gordon and not big on Culver (as opposed to consensus RealGM opinion?).

Love Murray for the Twolves. I feel like if they can change this trade around to get just Murray and hold on to Covington - that would be more ideal.

No idea for the Spurs. They always seem to come up with something to be competitive and I got no clue what direction they are headed. But I think Murray would make sense for the Magic also. (If they're out of the playoff hunt) Maybe something like Ross for Mills and Murray?

You can’t really think that is fair value?

Murray to Magic could work, just not ideal with him about to be paid, and not that 23/24 is old by any means, just not as ideal as full rookie contracts and draft picks with where this trade takes them.

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.

You may think Culver and #17 (which is almost the best case scenario) for Gordon is good value... but i don't. I find it terrible value. Unless AG got injured and I wasn't aware? Or demanded to be traded? I'd rather have Gordon by a considerable amount. Mid to late 1sts and unproven rookies in a flat & weak draft class don't exactly jump start a rebuild effort.

Additionally, I still can't figure out why the Magic would want to trade 23 yo Gordon even if they aren't making the playoffs. If the Magic are going to be tearing down and starting over, its going to be Ross, Vucevic, and Fournier that are dealt. Gordon is kept or dealt for a better fit or packaged with other assets for an available star.

If in 6 months Culver looks like a really nice player - then it may look better, but at this point... its really quite a bit off.

I think you are confusing personal choice vs. value. On the flip side I would say the flat draft myth is just you trying to drive down value of recent #7 overall.

If I am buying a house and don’t like the color or any features of my personal choice, I can try claiming the value is not worth what the market will bear — but the market is the market. If someone’s are lined up to say the house is worth asking price — you saying that it isn’t is just a personal choice.

This thread isn’t about trading Vooch (who would have some value), Fournier (negative value) or Ross (negative value), who if Magic tear It down probably try and move as well. Don’t know a thread had to involve the entire organization course of action.

Added: in any draft, #7 overall for Gordon on draft day is a overpay. Since the “drive off the lot” value and a player being attached (vs. Magic getting to draft who they may prefer if not Culver) I can see the need for more value — hence the 1st being added.

[tiderulz]

You can’t really think that is fair value?

Murray to Magic could work, just not ideal with him about to be paid, and not that 23/24 is old by any means, just not as ideal as full rookie contracts and draft picks with where this trade takes them.

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.

You may think Culver and #17 (which is almost the best case scenario) for Gordon is good value... but i don't. I find it terrible value. Unless AG got injured and I wasn't aware? Or demanded to be traded? I'd rather have Gordon by a considerable amount. Mid to late 1sts and unproven rookies in a flat & weak draft class don't exactly jump start a rebuild effort.

Additionally, I still can't figure out why the Magic would want to trade 23 yo Gordon even if they aren't making the playoffs. If the Magic are going to be tearing down and starting over, its going to be Ross, Vucevic, and Fournier that are dealt. Gordon is kept or dealt for a better fit or packaged with other assets for an available star.

If in 6 months Culver looks like a really nice player - then it may look better, but at this point... its really quite a bit off.

I think you are confusing personal choice vs. value. On the flip side I would say the flat draft myth is just you trying to drive down value of recent #7 overall.

If I am buying a house and don’t like the color or any features of my personal choice, I can try claiming the value is not worth what the market will bear — but the market is the market. If someone’s are lined up to say the house is worth asking price — you saying that it isn’t is just a personal choice.

This thread isn’t about trading Vooch (who would have some value), Fournier (negative value) or Ross (negative value), who if Magic tear It down probably try and move as well. Don’t know a thread had to involve the entire organization course of action.

Added: in any draft, #7 overall for Gordon on draft day is a overpay. Since the “drive off the lot” value and a player being attached (vs. Magic getting to draft who they may prefer if not Culver) I can see the need for more value — hence the 1st being added.

that is strictly your opinion. Why exactly is #7 an overpay for Gordon? if you dont value his game as worth that, then why do you post so many trades wanting to acquire Gordon?

and you have gone from saying Culver (#6) plus #17 is fair for Gordon to now saying #7 is an overpay for Gordon. you seem a little all over the map

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.

[rugbyrugger23]

You may think Culver and #17 (which is almost the best case scenario) for Gordon is good value... but i don't. I find it terrible value. Unless AG got injured and I wasn't aware? Or demanded to be traded? I'd rather have Gordon by a considerable amount. Mid to late 1sts and unproven rookies in a flat & weak draft class don't exactly jump start a rebuild effort.

Additionally, I still can't figure out why the Magic would want to trade 23 yo Gordon even if they aren't making the playoffs. If the Magic are going to be tearing down and starting over, its going to be Ross, Vucevic, and Fournier that are dealt. Gordon is kept or dealt for a better fit or packaged with other assets for an available star.

If in 6 months Culver looks like a really nice player - then it may look better, but at this point... its really quite a bit off.

I think you are confusing personal choice vs. value. On the flip side I would say the flat draft myth is just you trying to drive down value of recent #7 overall.

If I am buying a house and don’t like the color or any features of my personal choice, I can try claiming the value is not worth what the market will bear — but the market is the market. If someone’s are lined up to say the house is worth asking price — you saying that it isn’t is just a personal choice.

This thread isn’t about trading Vooch (who would have some value), Fournier (negative value) or Ross (negative value), who if Magic tear It down probably try and move as well. Don’t know a thread had to involve the entire organization course of action.

Added: in any draft, #7 overall for Gordon on draft day is a overpay. Since the “drive off the lot” value and a player being attached (vs. Magic getting to draft who they may prefer if not Culver) I can see the need for more value — hence the 1st being added.

that is strictly your opinion. Why exactly is #7 an overpay for Gordon? if you dont value his game as worth that, then why do you post so many trades wanting to acquire Gordon?

and you have gone from saying Culver (#6) plus #17 is fair for Gordon to now saying #7 is an overpay for Gordon. you seem a little all over the map

Culver and say #17 overall is very fair value for Gordon.

Sorry I meant #6 not #7.

How am I all over the map? You don’t see a difference between a draft pick on draft day vs. now? See my post above.