Ron Swanson wrote:They're not getting Beal at the deadline for Simmons. You guys haven't been paying attention to recent trends with star players getting dealt. GM's of teams with disgruntled stars are realizing now that the better asset play is to leverage as many future unprotected picks and swaps and as far out as possible.
If I'm Washington, or any organization that's looking at a complete tear down, why would I want an incredibly flawed player like Simmons on a max contract who I know has zero potential to be my franchise cornerstone? At least as the main value piece coming back in the deal? Give me 3 unprotected firsts, and 2 pick swaps spread out over the next 5 years, instead of Simmons and their 2022 1st. Knew right away that Morey botched this when the report leaked that he wouldn't include Maxey and Thybulle. Ever since fleecing OKC for Harden a decade ago, Daryl's been a "have his cake and eat it too" guy despite the GM'ing reality that you always need two to tango.
I agree for the most part, but with Washington, their owner is on public record saying they’ll never bottom out. He wants to be in the playoff race every year. I tend to think Washington is more likely to be buyers at the deadline than selling Beal. We’ll see though; I don’t think there’s any question that trading Beal would be the right thing to do from a team building perspective. Their options at this point are to supermax him, pretty much ensuring they’ll never be good and just making it more difficult to trade him down the line. Or they trade him now and get a good package (be it a total tear down or a Simmons based package), ensuring they’re bad in the short term but giving them a path to success in the long term.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk