nate33 wrote:NatP4 wrote:Pistons called to explore a Griffin-Wall deal. I’m assuming they asked for a 1st round pick, or multiple 1sts ontop of that.
Here's the link:
The only way it would make sense is if the trade also incorporated a swap of Killian Hayes and one of Avdija or Hachimura. I absolutely would not include any future picks.
It's worth noting that what it shouldn't include is EXACTLY what Detroit will be asking for. I think people are coming up w/some interesting counters to their ask, but what Detroit's trying to do is what any sane GM is trying to do.
We've got a bad contract.
You've got a bad contract and a terrible news cycle.
We'll take your bad contract and bad news cycle/potential cancer if you give us a future unprotected first, preferably your '21 first.
That's the ask. That's always the ask. I always find it amusing that Bill Simmons and his Boston colored glasses never applies the same circumspect attitude to trades for other teams that he would for his own, probably partly because his teams are mostly blessed with GM's disinclined to make stupid decisions, so he can't imagine them making those kinds of moves. He and Jackie talked about this on their podcast, and talked up the idea of a '21 1st and Wall for Blake Griffin. Part of their thinking came from the "Beal is gonna run out of patience angle", and one of the two of them talked about how to have protections w/the first. Regardless there is zero chance I would include a first period, and that's the only way to get any of these deals done.
The deals are predicated on, you give us the poison you have to drink, sweeten it w/a first, and we'll drink it instead. It's a rebuilding trade, we did it ourselves years ago, that's how they're done/built, period. They don't toss prospects back, they say, give us a legit asset, and we'll eat the contract. That's it. This is slightly different because bad contracts are being exchanged, but we're still in the weaker position in every single potential exchange.
You have to either be okay for selling out the future for a non-existent present, or not be okay with it. That's it. I'm not okay with it. Period. I will not trade away future firsts to make Beal or Wall happy. We've traded away enough future firsts in trying to build around both of them to no positive effect. We need to be done w/doing that. If Beal's not happy and can't be happy, trade him quietly before the stink of Aldridge type stories cuts his potential value, if Wall's not happy, he has to sit and eat it until he's movable. It's really that simple.