Thoughts in General, Rumors, etc 5.0

[zimpy27]

But, at that point, why not stay cheaper and have the equal or better playmaker in Sabonis?

This is why I see a Turner/Davion Mitchell swap as more likely.

For Indy? I think that is better for short term wins but my sense from the Levert trade is that Indy is looking to build a little more longterm.

I don’t follow. Seems like it’s better than getting worse and more expensive while trading your best piece.

Kings haven't shown interest in Turner. They have Holmes who is a better fit with Sabonis. Sabonis they have asked for.

Pacers accepted picks for LeVert, I see the direction as wanting to get picks from either Sabonis and Turner. In this scenario, they get a pick or more from the Kings for Sabonis with Fox.

[HartfordWhalers]

Current trade deadline rankings:
1) Indy
2) Lac
3) Cle
4) Portland

[Scoot McGroot]

For Indy? I think that is better for short term wins but my sense from the Levert trade is that Indy is looking to build a little more longterm.

I don’t follow. Seems like it’s better than getting worse and more expensive while trading your best piece.

Kings haven't shown interest in Turner. They have Holmes who is a better fit with Sabonis. Sabonis they have asked for.

They’ve been rumored to be interested in both.

Pacers accepted picks for LeVert, I see the direction as wanting to get picks from either Sabonis and Turner. In this scenario, they get a pick or more from the Kings for Sabonis with Fox.

Pacers already have 3 picks in top 35 for this year. Don’t think they’ll really want 4 or 5. Sacramento isn’t willing to give a 1st with Fox, reportedly, but you suggest they’ll give a top lotto pick with him?

Otherwise, we took what the market gave us in Levert. Reportedly Turner is more likely dealt than Sabonis. But we also MAY be done. I don’t think anyone else is a MUST TRADE kind of thing right now. Turner might be the closest?

[HartfordWhalers]

Btw if Cleveland fails LeVert on the physical and rescinds the trade, I will give them all the props in the world for getting a game day advantage

[Scoot McGroot]

Btw if Cleveland fails LeVert on the physical and rescinds the trade, I will give them all the props in the world for getting a game day advantage

Yikes. Hadn’t even considered it

[Karmaloop]

Look I'm fine if the Lakers don't want PatBev for whatever reason. But he's one of those guys everyone hates on the other team and loves on theirs. He's like a hockey instigator. Your Steve Ott or your Claude Lemioux. My guess is if he was a Laker within about 2 weeks karmaloop would love the guy.

But the Lakers have no assets and difficulties with salary matching. They definitely don't get to be choosy. They probably will be hoping Dragic gets bought out and chooses them and then settle for DJ Augustin or something.

I've already mentioned that I thought Beverley is an ideal fit for what the Lakers want/need at PG, but given his comments when he was a Clipper and his other antics, I just don't see him getting a warm welcome into the Lakers' locker room. DJ Augustin was someone I was thinking, but maybe someone slightly better. LIS, doesn't need to be a game changer, but just someone who can come in run the offense, knock down open shots, and not be a matador defensively.

[shangrila]

I don’t follow. Seems like it’s better than getting worse and more expensive while trading your best piece.

Kings haven't shown interest in Turner. They have Holmes who is a better fit with Sabonis. Sabonis they have asked for.

They’ve been rumored to be interested in both.

Pacers accepted picks for LeVert, I see the direction as wanting to get picks from either Sabonis and Turner. In this scenario, they get a pick or more from the Kings for Sabonis with Fox.

Pacers already have 3 picks in top 35 for this year. Don’t think they’ll really want 4 or 5. Sacramento isn’t willing to give a 1st with Fox, reportedly, but you suggest they’ll give a top lotto pick with him?

Otherwise, we took what the market gave us in Levert. Reportedly Turner is more likely dealt than Sabonis. But we also MAY be done. I don’t think anyone else is a MUST TRADE kind of thing right now. Turner might be the closest?

That's a really good point. Would they be looking at future 1sts then?

Thinking from a Wolves perspective, given the reported interest in Turner.

[Scoot McGroot]

Kings haven't shown interest in Turner. They have Holmes who is a better fit with Sabonis. Sabonis they have asked for.

They’ve been rumored to be interested in both.

Pacers accepted picks for LeVert, I see the direction as wanting to get picks from either Sabonis and Turner. In this scenario, they get a pick or more from the Kings for Sabonis with Fox.

Pacers already have 3 picks in top 35 for this year. Don’t think they’ll really want 4 or 5. Sacramento isn’t willing to give a 1st with Fox, reportedly, but you suggest they’ll give a top lotto pick with him?

Otherwise, we took what the market gave us in Levert. Reportedly Turner is more likely dealt than Sabonis. But we also MAY be done. I don’t think anyone else is a MUST TRADE kind of thing right now. Turner might be the closest?

That's a really good point. Would they be looking at future 1sts then?

Thinking from a Wolves perspective, given the reported interest in Turner.

I don’t know. I’m genuinely shocked we traded Levert for a future 1st. Like, this is the first future 1st from another team that the Pacers have owned in my lifetime, and I’m almost in my 40’s. Generally, I would think the Pacers would look for future pieces. Generally, we’ve made deals for young guys ready to take the next step more than for unknown picks. If the Wolves are involved, I would imagine Vanderbilt or McDaniels would be targeted more than future picks. But, I didn’t expect this to happen either.

Hypothetically, I keep coming around to Turner to Sacramento for Davion Mitchell and expirings for this reason. It may not be right, but it’s the kind of idea I envision for Indy. Vanderbilt or McDaniels would match that defensive focus wanted from a different position, but would understand better how to fit in the nba than an undrafted guy.

[zimpy27]

They’ve been rumored to be interested in both.



Pacers already have 3 picks in top 35 for this year. Don’t think they’ll really want 4 or 5. Sacramento isn’t willing to give a 1st with Fox, reportedly, but you suggest they’ll give a top lotto pick with him?

Otherwise, we took what the market gave us in Levert. Reportedly Turner is more likely dealt than Sabonis. But we also MAY be done. I don’t think anyone else is a MUST TRADE kind of thing right now. Turner might be the closest?

That's a really good point. Would they be looking at future 1sts then?

Thinking from a Wolves perspective, given the reported interest in Turner.

I don’t know. I’m genuinely shocked we traded Levert for a future 1st. Like, this is the first future 1st from another team that the Pacers have owned in my lifetime, and I’m almost in my 40’s. Generally, I would think the Pacers would look for future pieces. Generally, we’ve made deals for young guys ready to take the next step more than for unknown picks. If the Wolves are involved, I would imagine Vanderbilt or McDaniels would be targeted more than future picks. But, I didn’t expect this to happen either.

Hypothetically, I keep coming around to Turner to Sacramento for Davion Mitchell and expirings for this reason. It may not be right, but it’s the kind of idea I envision for Indy. Vanderbilt or McDaniels would match that defensive focus wanted from a different position, but would understand better how to fit in the nba than an undrafted guy.

Well, you just got Duarte and Jackson and seem happy with them. I could see the Pacers looking to add through the draft, perhaps pick off multi-year college guys. Perhaps they are really comfortable with their drafting team right now.

[shangrila]

They’ve been rumored to be interested in both.



Pacers already have 3 picks in top 35 for this year. Don’t think they’ll really want 4 or 5. Sacramento isn’t willing to give a 1st with Fox, reportedly, but you suggest they’ll give a top lotto pick with him?

Otherwise, we took what the market gave us in Levert. Reportedly Turner is more likely dealt than Sabonis. But we also MAY be done. I don’t think anyone else is a MUST TRADE kind of thing right now. Turner might be the closest?

That's a really good point. Would they be looking at future 1sts then?

Thinking from a Wolves perspective, given the reported interest in Turner.

I don’t know. I’m genuinely shocked we traded Levert for a future 1st. Like, this is the first future 1st from another team that the Pacers have owned in my lifetime, and I’m almost in my 40’s. Generally, I would think the Pacers would look for future pieces. Generally, we’ve made deals for young guys ready to take the next step more than for unknown picks. If the Wolves are involved, I would imagine Vanderbilt or McDaniels would be targeted more than future picks. But, I didn’t expect this to happen either.

Hypothetically, I keep coming around to Turner to Sacramento for Davion Mitchell and expirings for this reason. It may not be right, but it’s the kind of idea I envision for Indy. Vanderbilt or McDaniels would match that defensive focus wanted from a different position, but would understand better how to fit in the nba than an undrafted guy.

I'll admit, your future 1st talk kind of threw me there. I thought maybe that Cleveland pick was in '23 or something.

And yeah, if the price for Turner is either Vando or McDaniels then we'd probably just go looking elsewhere. Which might be what happened, given there were plenty of rumours about MIN/Turner earlier but silence since.

[Blazer1776]

Just a question…..can Portland trade the lotto portion of their 22 draft pick, prior to making the lotto?

I guess what I’m asking:

Since Chicago gets it if it becomes a non-lotto pick.

Can Portland trade it under the stipulation that they make the lotto?

[K_chile22]

Just a question…..can Portland trade the lotto portion of their 22 draft pick, prior to making the lotto?

I guess what I’m asking:

Since Chicago gets it if it becomes a non-lotto pick.

Can Portland trade it under the stipulation that they make the lotto?

Yeah, called a reverse protection. They'd send a pick that's protected 15-30

[Texas Chuck]

Just a question…..can Portland trade the lotto portion of their 22 draft pick, prior to making the lotto?

I guess what I’m asking:

Since Chicago gets it if it becomes a non-lotto pick.

Can Portland trade it under the stipulation that they make the lotto?

Not without talking to Chicago. Because they can't not have a pick in two consecutive drafts forward looking and if they gave a pick to another team this year, that interferes with their ability to transfer a pick to Chicago the following year.

[Blazer1776]

Just a question…..can Portland trade the lotto portion of their 22 draft pick, prior to making the lotto?

I guess what I’m asking:

Since Chicago gets it if it becomes a non-lotto pick.

Can Portland trade it under the stipulation that they make the lotto?

Yeah, called a reverse protection. They'd send a pick that's protected 15-30

That opens up some pretty interesting options for Portland.

With dame/nance out and RoCo/Powell and likely CJ gone, they might have the worst roster in the NBA the second half of the season.

I’m expecting they end up between 3-5. I wonder who that could fetch.

[Resistance]

Just a question…..can Portland trade the lotto portion of their 22 draft pick, prior to making the lotto?

I guess what I’m asking:

Since Chicago gets it if it becomes a non-lotto pick.

Can Portland trade it under the stipulation that they make the lotto?

89. How are draft picks handled in trades? What is the Ted Stepien rule?


Teams are restricted from trading away future first round draft picks in consecutive years. This is known as the "Ted Stepien Rule." Stepien owned the Cavs from 1980-83, and made a series of bad trades (such as the 1980 trade mentioned above) that cost the Cavs several years' first round picks. As a result of Stepien's ineptitude, teams are now prevented from making trades which might leave them without a first round pick in consecutive future years.

The Stepien rule applies only to future first round picks. For example, if this is the 2017-18 season, then a team can trade its 2018 first round pick without regard to whether they had traded their 2017 pick, since their 2017 pick is no longer a future pick. But they can't trade away both their 2018 and 2019 picks, since both are future picks. Teams sometimes work around this rule by trading first round picks in alternate years, or by giving one team the right to swap picks with the other.

When dealing with protected picks, the Stepien rule is interpreted to mean that a team can't trade a pick if there is any chance at all that it will leave the team without a first round pick in consecutive future drafts.



Future Traded Pick Details


2022 first round draft pick to Chicago
Portland's 1st round pick to Chicago protected for selections 1-14 in 2022, 1-14 in 2023, 1-14 in 2024, 1-14 in 2025, 1-14 in 2026, 1-14 in 2027 and 1-14 in 2028; if Portland has not conveyed a 1st round pick to Chicago by 2028, then Portland will instead convey its 2028 2nd round pick to Chicago [Chicago-Portland, 8/28/2021]; Chicago may forfeit Portland's 2028 2nd round pick (see Chicago Outgoing)

[K_chile22]

Just a question…..can Portland trade the lotto portion of their 22 draft pick, prior to making the lotto?

I guess what I’m asking:

Since Chicago gets it if it becomes a non-lotto pick.

Can Portland trade it under the stipulation that they make the lotto?

Not without talking to Chicago. Because they can't not have a pick in two consecutive drafts forward looking and if they gave a pick to another team this year, that interferes with their ability to transfer a pick to Chicago the following year.

Oof yeah forgot about stepian with regards to the pick rolling over
Could still move it at the draft though, just not before then

[Blazer1776]

Just a question…..can Portland trade the lotto portion of their 22 draft pick, prior to making the lotto?

I guess what I’m asking:

Since Chicago gets it if it becomes a non-lotto pick.

Can Portland trade it under the stipulation that they make the lotto?

Not without talking to Chicago. Because they can't not have a pick in two consecutive drafts forward looking and if they gave a pick to another team this year, that interferes with their ability to transfer a pick to Chicago the following year.

Oof yeah forgot about stepian with regards to the pick rolling over
Could still move it at the draft though, just not before then

Gotcha.

[Scoot McGroot]

That's a really good point. Would they be looking at future 1sts then?

Thinking from a Wolves perspective, given the reported interest in Turner.

I don’t know. I’m genuinely shocked we traded Levert for a future 1st. Like, this is the first future 1st from another team that the Pacers have owned in my lifetime, and I’m almost in my 40’s. Generally, I would think the Pacers would look for future pieces. Generally, we’ve made deals for young guys ready to take the next step more than for unknown picks. If the Wolves are involved, I would imagine Vanderbilt or McDaniels would be targeted more than future picks. But, I didn’t expect this to happen either.

Hypothetically, I keep coming around to Turner to Sacramento for Davion Mitchell and expirings for this reason. It may not be right, but it’s the kind of idea I envision for Indy. Vanderbilt or McDaniels would match that defensive focus wanted from a different position, but would understand better how to fit in the nba than an undrafted guy.

Well, you just got Duarte and Jackson and seem happy with them. I could see the Pacers looking to add through the draft, perhaps pick off multi-year college guys. Perhaps they are really comfortable with their drafting team right now.

They always were confident in their drafting team for the 35+ years before now, but they still didn’t trade for future undetermined draft picks.

[Scoot McGroot]

That's a really good point. Would they be looking at future 1sts then?

Thinking from a Wolves perspective, given the reported interest in Turner.

I don’t know. I’m genuinely shocked we traded Levert for a future 1st. Like, this is the first future 1st from another team that the Pacers have owned in my lifetime, and I’m almost in my 40’s. Generally, I would think the Pacers would look for future pieces. Generally, we’ve made deals for young guys ready to take the next step more than for unknown picks. If the Wolves are involved, I would imagine Vanderbilt or McDaniels would be targeted more than future picks. But, I didn’t expect this to happen either.

Hypothetically, I keep coming around to Turner to Sacramento for Davion Mitchell and expirings for this reason. It may not be right, but it’s the kind of idea I envision for Indy. Vanderbilt or McDaniels would match that defensive focus wanted from a different position, but would understand better how to fit in the nba than an undrafted guy.

I'll admit, your future 1st talk kind of threw me there. I thought maybe that Cleveland pick was in '23 or something.

And yeah, if the price for Turner is either Vando or McDaniels then we'd probably just go looking elsewhere. Which might be what happened, given there were plenty of rumours about MIN/Turner earlier but silence since.

Yeah. It’ll take something to get a good player. I don’t think they’re just gonna go with far off 1sts or something. But I think they might just be taking what the market gives them? So, if a Minnesota is offering 3 1sts, then You’d have to listen. 2 1sts, and we definitely keep listening to the market to see if we can get a specific fit, rather than just unknowns.

As for the Cavs being referred to as future 1st, it was mostly a reference that the season isn’t over and the pick is undetermined. 18th or 28th would be wildly different value and both could be possible.

[Resistance]

I don’t know. I’m genuinely shocked we traded Levert for a future 1st. Like, this is the first future 1st from another team that the Pacers have owned in my lifetime, and I’m almost in my 40’s. Generally, I would think the Pacers would look for future pieces. Generally, we’ve made deals for young guys ready to take the next step more than for unknown picks. If the Wolves are involved, I would imagine Vanderbilt or McDaniels would be targeted more than future picks. But, I didn’t expect this to happen either.

Hypothetically, I keep coming around to Turner to Sacramento for Davion Mitchell and expirings for this reason. It may not be right, but it’s the kind of idea I envision for Indy. Vanderbilt or McDaniels would match that defensive focus wanted from a different position, but would understand better how to fit in the nba than an undrafted guy.

I'll admit, your future 1st talk kind of threw me there. I thought maybe that Cleveland pick was in '23 or something.

And yeah, if the price for Turner is either Vando or McDaniels then we'd probably just go looking elsewhere. Which might be what happened, given there were plenty of rumours about MIN/Turner earlier but silence since.

Yeah. It’ll take something to get a good player. I don’t think they’re just gonna go with far off 1sts or something. But I think they might just be taking what the market gives them? So, if a Minnesota is offering 3 1sts, then You’d have to listen. 2 1sts, and we definitely keep listening to the market to see if we can get a specific fit, rather than just unknowns.

As for the Cavs being referred to as future 1st, it was mostly a reference that the season isn’t over and the pick is undetermined. 18th or 28th would be wildly different value and both could be possible.

But I think they might just be taking what the market gives them?

Does that suggest that the way teams conduct their operations has changed or Front Offices are better or worse than say a decade ago?

There will always be Front Offices that outperform and Front Offices that underperform, that is the nature of things.

Are owners better than they used to be? Are the Billy King, David Kahn etc types less likely to get the top spots in a FO.

I know that it took a while for Vlade to be replaced, so some owners still let things drag out longer than they should, but has there been improvement overall?