Official Trade Thread - Part XLIV

[doclinkin]

All of these rumors about how multiple teams are bidding on Mitchell are being "leaked" by Utah to drive up the price.

The Gobert trade really distorted the market, but just because it was distorted once, doesn't mean that's the new standard. Markets can correct. Mitchell isn't worth 6 first round picks or whatever the hell Ainge thinks he is.

Yes. And the market will be back to normal by the time Siakam asks for a trade at trade deadline. And our “assets” will have proven they are assets by then. It’s all shaping up nicely. Now, we have to start the season strong. That’s Kuzma’s, Beal’s, Taj’s and the coach’s job. We can’t spend two months playing experimental line-ups to “see what we got.” We need to hit hard out the gate and make a trade when we fall back to earth.

Not Beal's usual style even before a wrist injury. He typically starts slow then he goes on a streak starting in January. I expect with new personnel finding their roles, and a 2nd year coach, we will likely see a few alterations of the line-up to start the season. Beal's typical slow start is surely part of that, magnified by time off and possibly the Big Contract slump that most players see.

[payitforward]

Plus... Taj Gibson is going to power us into starting the season strong?

[barelyawake]

All of these rumors about how multiple teams are bidding on Mitchell are being "leaked" by Utah to drive up the price.

The Gobert trade really distorted the market, but just because it was distorted once, doesn't mean that's the new standard. Markets can correct. Mitchell isn't worth 6 first round picks or whatever the hell Ainge thinks he is.

Yes. And the market will be back to normal by the time Siakam asks for a trade at trade deadline. And our “assets” will have proven they are assets by then. It’s all shaping up nicely. Now, we have to start the season strong. That’s Kuzma’s, Beal’s, Taj’s and the coach’s job. We can’t spend two months playing experimental line-ups to “see what we got.” We need to hit hard out the gate and make a trade when we fall back to earth.

Not Beal's usual style even before a wrist injury. He typically starts slow then he goes on a streak starting in January. I expect with new personnel finding their roles, and a 2nd year coach, we will likely see a few alterations of the line-up to start the season. Beal's typical slow start is surely part of that, magnified by time off and possibly the Big Contract slump that most players see.

Big contract slump? There better be a big contract jump from last year. I assume there will. Not only because last season was an aberration; not only because of the contract; but, because this team has been constructed around and for Beal. He got everything he wants. He better god damn produce.

Our team usually starts slow, except for the year that Pierce pushed them out the gate. But, I believe Kuz and Taj have been saying the right things about next season, and our players already have connections.Taj is going to be like Montrezl in terms of setting the tone.

But, yeah, knowing this team, I’m setting myself up for disappointment. I’m just hoping this GM is actually trying to build a contender, and that would mean a big trade next trade deadline. And, knowing that, that he’s had a conservation with Beal about how we need our assets to be assets by trade deadline, if Beal actually wants the contender he says he wants. One can dream for competence.

[doclinkin]

Yes. And the market will be back to normal by the time Siakam asks for a trade at trade deadline. And our “assets” will have proven they are assets by then. It’s all shaping up nicely. Now, we have to start the season strong. That’s Kuzma’s, Beal’s, Taj’s and the coach’s job. We can’t spend two months playing experimental line-ups to “see what we got.” We need to hit hard out the gate and make a trade when we fall back to earth.

Not Beal's usual style even before a wrist injury. He typically starts slow then he goes on a streak starting in January. I expect with new personnel finding their roles, and a 2nd year coach, we will likely see a few alterations of the line-up to start the season. Beal's typical slow start is surely part of that, magnified by time off and possibly the Big Contract slump that most players see.

Big contract slump? There better be a big contract jump from last year. I assume there will. Not only because last season was an [aberration]; not only because of the contract; but, because this team has been constructed around and for Beal. He got everything he wants. He better god damn produce.

Just recognize Beal has been in a contract year every year for the past few years. Short term extensions, trying to earn All-Star or All-NBA status, scoring title, etc. so he could qualify for the SuperMax. He has been on a prolonged push for the next contract. Ernie used to get contract year veterans so he could take advantage of that additional motivation to get a late-career surge of effort. Beal's 'will he or won't he' routine of contract extension teasing kept him in a constant state of revving his engine in order to earn the Big One. And his gunning for it was one of the chemistry issues last year, the rules changes and COVID hit him during his last chance to earn a megamax that will set him up for life. It failed him personally, but we rewarded him anyway. Good effort, nice try, attaboy. It is not unexpected that we see a drop-off in effort now that he has it, that is what usually happens when players finally earn the giant payday. Is Beal the hyper competitive sort who raises his game no matter the stakes? Ask yourself, does Beal play harder against better teams? Does he play with more motivation in the playoffs? Do we tend to go on a run late in the season when we are desperate to win those last few games? It seems to me he does, that during the Beal years we have been able to compete against the toughest teams but often overlook the lesser teams. Seems to me a player like that might coast somewhat when the pressure is off.

To me though Beal taking a sidestep might be the best thing for the team. At his peak he is above average in efficiency. Not dominant. Beal with the ball is more predictable and stoppable than Beal running patterns off ball and drawing attention and misdirection from players tracking him. Porzingis was efficient last year. Kispert was better than Beal. Beal was most efficient when Wall was drawing attention. I like Beal as a secondary player, and he has always shown that he knows what to do when the ball is not falling. He rebounds better and passes better on his off shooting nights. There is a chance this team plays an actual team game if Beal has the pressure off him to play as Alpha wolf every night. He can play smart team ball instead, low ego, make the smart play, know when the smartest play is as a decoy and when it is critical to score. Let Kispert or Kuz back door them to death when they load up to stop you. Or Rui if someone can teach him a signal to know when to crash the paint.

Or if Beal takes it upon himself to teach others how to raise their game. Johnny Davis in particular will need a crash tutorial on all the skills Beal has had to develop. Beal now has to find ways to make every other player better, since he owns the team's record for the life of his contract now. No more gunning for his own stats, wins and losses are all that matter. There is a chance though that he does, that he invests in tutoring the younger cats, as he does with his AAU squad.

And okay maybe Beal plays better due to chemistry. Monte Morris should help Beal by hitting him when he is open, and adding spacing for the kick out three if Beal is stopped on a drive. Porzingis at the high post seems like an excellent pairing if Beal can regain anything like his former 3pt shot. There is a chance that chemistry is what drives the team to a better record than the individual talents suggest. And that is more up to Unseld than anyone else. So long as the players buy in. And yeah better if it happens early. Because Beal tends to start slow. And it could get ugly with fans getting frustrated watching a quarter billion dollars clank shots and bitch to referees.

[gambitx777]

Man I'm telling you! I kind of like our package for Mitchell.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[barelyawake]

Doc, that last part is exactly what I was thinking. And not just fans. Press. Other players. His image is as a guy who just wanted the money. Remember, Beal came out with the statement about “wanting to be somewhere I can win a championship” because everyone was saying he’s all about the money. They are waiting to say that again. Plus, we have Kuz who is like a male cheerleader. We have Morris. We have Barton. We have Wright. We have Deni. And we have Gafford. Those guys go hard every game. As I said, call me a dreamer. But, I’m betting we come out winning early.

Btw Doc, I agree with your entire post. And in a normal year, I’d agree about us coming out slow for the reason you suggest. I’m actually giving our GM credit that he got SOMETHING out of giving Beal everything including the no trade clause. I’m hoping he got “more leadership” and “co-operation with the plan.” That’s what I would have asked for. And I’m hoping Beal coming on early to help Davis is an example of that. We shall see if these guys, including our GM, are worth a damn or not.

[WallToWall]

Man I'm telling you! I kind of like our package for Mitchell.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

They’re looking for draft picks, and Knicks have a lot more to give up….if they choose to give them up.

[gambitx777]

Man I'm telling you! I kind of like our package for Mitchell.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

They’re looking for draft picks, and Knicks have a lot more to give up….if they choose to give them up.

That's the issue, sure the NYK can over pay for DM but do they want too. If they value him at 3 firsts and some young guys hell we can pay that. It depends on the valuation. What Danny was asking for the NYK was stupid. They shouldn't pay that they shouldn't ove pay just because Danny knows they have it. They NYK have to ask what they want and how they want to get there. Telling Danny to go fly a kite because they know no everyone's best offer is they NYK base offer, would be overall wise.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[gambitx777]

Are we hard capped ?
Yes we are. Apparently because of the wright signing.
So unless we trade Barton and kuz I don't think we can even get DM and then feild a team. I'm sure we could get creative but it limits us

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[payitforward]

This year: subtracting Barton & Kuz & adding Mitchell would leave us $3m into the luxury tax with 14 players.

Not to mention that it would leave us well into the lux tax for next year with 10 players -- assuming KP picks up his option, but not including picking up Deni's option or a '23 R1 pick (& of course not including Rui either).

Ridiculous....

[gambitx777]

This year: subtracting Barton & Kuz & adding Mitchell would leave us $3m into the luxury tax with 14 players.

Not to mention that it would leave us well into the lux tax for next year with 10 players -- assuming KP picks up his option, but not including picking up Deni's option or a '23 R1 pick (& of course not including Rui either).

Ridiculous....

I thought of an interesting three team trade.

Wiz in
Mitchell

Lakers in
Gay, Clarkson, bogdonavoc, and Conley

Jazz In
ThT, Westbrook, Rui, kuz, Barton, Davis, Todd.
3 wiz first 2 pick swaps and 2 seconds from the Lakers and a first.

Saved the jazz a ton of money, gets them a good pick haul, and some young players.

The Lakers retool

We get a second star, that leaves the wiz almost 5 mill under the tax with 11 players

Guards
Beal, DM, wright, Morris

Wings
Kispert, Den

Forwards
KP, Gibson, Gill

Center
Gafford/Cary JR

So what would we do.
We woul have to go barn shopping I guess. Hope to God Deni and kispert take a leap. KP will probably split time at center, but other than him if kispert and Deni don't take leaps our forward /wing spots are thin.

Two options.
Go heavy on one year older vet deals or go young

The summer league team offers some cheap young options in Echenique, Schckel, Dotson and Jackson. We're the stand outs and probably deserve a look.

As for what's left on the free agent market according to hoops wire.

Power Forwards

Carmelo Anthony (38)
Trevor Ariza (37)
Devontae Cacok (26)
Gary Clark (28)
Tyler Cook (25)
Petr Cornelie (27)
Mamadi Diakite (25)
Malik Fitts (25)
JaMychal Green (32)
Blake Griffin (33)
Alize Johnson (26)
James Johnson (35)
Paul Millsap (37)
Juwan Morgan (25)
Markieff Morris (33)
Semi Ojeleye (28)
Jabari Parker (27)
Eric Paschall (26)
Reggie Perry (22)
Chris Silva (26)
Moses Wright (24)

Small Forwards

Justin Anderson (29)
Kent Bazemore (33)
DeAndre’ Bembry (28)
Keljin Blevins (27)
Isaac Bonga (23)
CJ Elleby (22)
Solomon Hill (31)
Jaylen Hoard (23)
Rodney Hood (30)
Elijah Hughes (24)
Andre Iguodala (38)
Josh Jackson (25)
Justin Jackson (27)
Georgios Kalaitzakis (23)
Louis King (23)
Anthony Lamb (24)
Jake Layman (28)
Timothe Luwawu-Cabarrot (27)
Kelan Martin (27)
Alfonzo McKinnie (30)
Abdel Nader (29)
Miye Oni (25)
Jamorko Pickett (25)
Yves Pons (23)
Matt Ryan (25)
Tony Snell (31)
Lance Stephenson (32)
Ishmail Wainright (28)
Yuta Watanabe (28)
Robert Woodard II (23)

Young guys I'd take a look at would be Reggie Perry, Moses Wright, Mamadi Diakite, Jawan morgan, Isaac bonga( the return), Elijah hughes, Anthony lamb, jaylen hoard, Matt Ryan .

Retread guys.
Carmello, hood, layman wainwright, Anderson, parker , Morris, TLC, Ojeleye.

Not saying those are great options but I'm saying it's doable. Would be maybe have to go into the tax... Probably. Idk it's an option .

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[Dat2U]

This year: subtracting Barton & Kuz & adding Mitchell would leave us $3m into the luxury tax with 14 players.

Not to mention that it would leave us well into the lux tax for next year with 10 players -- assuming KP picks up his option, but not including picking up Deni's option or a '23 R1 pick (& of course not including Rui either).

Ridiculous....

There's two major team building approaches. One is a star driven approach where a team will willingly tank or fork over valuable assets for star level talent. Basically that's asking your top 2 or 3 guys to do the heavy lifting and it requires true star power for it to work and you hope you have enough quality depth to support the work of your star players.

The other approach is building a deep roster of versatile & playable options that fit well together in the hopes that depth & chemistry can survive the grind of the season over come elite talent.

Both ways have worked. I also don't think its terrible idea to use future 1sts if an elite talent can be acquired.

The second option is harder because its literally like threading a needle since the impact of the game's best players can dwarf the solid contributions of a group playing well together. Certainly you can aim to build the next Detroit Pistons but that requires incredible skill & making right decision after right decision as a GM.

I'm not on the Mitchell to DC bandwagon but our depth is severly overrated here. Maybe Avdija becomes a solid starter but none of our guys give me hope that they can really move the needle. Trotting out a deep team of mediocre guys doesn't really help in the win column or put butts in the seats. I also think alot of man hours is wasted on the long term development of guys who are no better than an 8th-9th man on most other teams.

So trading all of our 'depth' for something of actually value doesn't appear to be a terrible idea to me. Especially since our depth appears quite replaceable.

[nate33]

This year: subtracting Barton & Kuz & adding Mitchell would leave us $3m into the luxury tax with 14 players.

Not to mention that it would leave us well into the lux tax for next year with 10 players -- assuming KP picks up his option, but not including picking up Deni's option or a '23 R1 pick (& of course not including Rui either).

Ridiculous....

There's two major team building approaches. One is a star driven approach where a team will willingly tank or fork over valuable assets for star level talent. Basically that's asking your top 2 or 3 guys to do the heavy lifting and it requires true star power for it to work and you hope you have enough quality depth to support the work of your star players.

The other approach is building a deep roster of versatile & playable options that fit well together in the hopes that depth & chemistry can survive the grind of the season over come elite talent.

Both ways have worked. I also don't think its terrible idea to use future 1sts if an elite talent can be acquired.

The second option is harder because its literally like threading a needle since the impact of the game's best players can dwarf the solid contributions of a group playing well together. Certainly you can aim to build the next Detroit Pistons but that requires incredible skill & making right decision after right decision as a GM.

I'm not on the Mitchell to DC bandwagon but our depth is severly overrated here. Maybe Avdija becomes a solid starter but none of our guys give me hope that they can really move the needle. Trotting out a deep team of mediocre guys doesn't really help in the win column or put butts in the seats. I also think alot of man hours is wasted on the long term development of guys who are no better than an 8th-9th man on most other teams.

So trading all of our 'depth' for something of actually value doesn't appear to be a terrible idea to me. Especially since our depth appears quite replaceable.

Trading depth for stars is great. But trading 5 years of future lotto picks is a really bad idea. That depth won't be so easily replaceable with no draft picks.

[Dat2U]

This year: subtracting Barton & Kuz & adding Mitchell would leave us $3m into the luxury tax with 14 players.

Not to mention that it would leave us well into the lux tax for next year with 10 players -- assuming KP picks up his option, but not including picking up Deni's option or a '23 R1 pick (& of course not including Rui either).

Ridiculous....

There's two major team building approaches. One is a star driven approach where a team will willingly tank or fork over valuable assets for star level talent. Basically that's asking your top 2 or 3 guys to do the heavy lifting and it requires true star power for it to work and you hope you have enough quality depth to support the work of your star players.

The other approach is building a deep roster of versatile & playable options that fit well together in the hopes that depth & chemistry can survive the grind of the season over come elite talent.

Both ways have worked. I also don't think its terrible idea to use future 1sts if an elite talent can be acquired.

The second option is harder because its literally like threading a needle since the impact of the game's best players can dwarf the solid contributions of a group playing well together. Certainly you can aim to build the next Detroit Pistons but that requires incredible skill & making right decision after right decision as a GM.

I'm not on the Mitchell to DC bandwagon but our depth is severly overrated here. Maybe Avdija becomes a solid starter but none of our guys give me hope that they can really move the needle. Trotting out a deep team of mediocre guys doesn't really help in the win column or put butts in the seats. I also think alot of man hours is wasted on the long term development of guys who are no better than an 8th-9th man on most other teams.

So trading all of our 'depth' for something of actually value doesn't appear to be a terrible idea to me. Especially since our depth appears quite replaceable.

Trading depth for stars is great. But trading 5 years of future lotto picks is a really bad idea. That depth won't be so easily replaceable with no draft picks.

So are you really telling me its nearly impossible to find the next Javale McGee, Oleksey Pecherov, Nick Young, Chris Singleton, Jan Vesely, Rui Hachimura, Corey Kispert or Johnny Davis without 1st round picks???

[Illuminaire]

So are you really telling me its nearly impossible to find the next Javale McGee, Oleksey Pecherov, Nick Young, Chris Singleton, Jan Vesely, Rui Hachimura, Corey Kispert or Johnny Davis without 1st round picks???

It's hard to find them on cheap rookie deals.

I do agree you have to actually draft well to get value out of draft picks. I think the larger point is that draft picks are generally the most cost efficient way to add quality depth to a roster, so losing them for half a decade is a major hurdle for teams that want to contend. There is a reason most superteams flame out relatively quickly, and only the ones who keep their draft stockpile become lasting dynasties.

For a team that just wants a star to showboat around and go nowhere with, sure, dump em.

[deneem4]

Kd for Beal
Show him how the hometown feel

[WallToWall]

Trading depth for stars is great. But trading 5 years of future lotto picks is a really bad idea. That depth won't be so easily replaceable with no draft picks.

In this hypothetical situation, if we have 2 near stars, chances are we will be middle of the pack team, and that means a mid-round pick. Our front office have not shown the capability of making great mid-round picks, as we are not as good as some other teams at evaluating and identifying the types of college or foreign talent on which to roll the dice. So these mid round picks are not as valuable to the Wizards as they may be to other teams. Our current front office strength is in identifying NBA quality players on cheap deals for trade. Therefor, trading future picks is not a bad idea for this team.
We should trade 5 future 1st round picks in the right deal.
This possible DM deal is not that deal.

[nate33]

Trading depth for stars is great. But trading 5 years of future lotto picks is a really bad idea. That depth won't be so easily replaceable with no draft picks.

In this hypothetical situation, if we have 2 near stars, chances are we will be middle of the pack team, and that means a mid-round pick. Our front office have not shown the capability of making great mid-round picks, as we are not as good as some other teams at evaluating and identifying the types of college or foreign talent on which to roll the dice. So these mid round picks are not as valuable to the Wizards as they may be to other teams. Our current front office strength is in identifying NBA quality players on cheap deals for trade. Therefor, trading future picks is not a bad idea for this team.
We should trade 5 future 1st round picks in the right deal.
This possible DM deal is not that deal.

Yeah, I'd trade 5 future firsts for Luka or Jokic, but not for Donovan freaking Mitchell. He is a fringe All-Star who happens to be completely redundant with our current fringe All Star.

[payitforward]

...There's two major team building approaches. One is a star driven approach where a team will willingly tank or fork over valuable assets for star level talent. Basically that's asking your top 2 or 3 guys to do the heavy lifting and it requires true star power for it to work and you hope you have enough quality depth to support the work of your star players.

The other approach is building a deep roster of versatile & playable options that fit well together in the hopes that depth & chemistry can survive the grind of the season over come elite talent....

Respectfully, I think both these "approaches" are kind of mythical. E.g....

GS didn't "tank" to acquire Steph. They were simply lucky enough to find him there (look who got taken above him) & smart enough to take him (look who got taken in the handful of spots after him.

They didn't tank to find Klay Thompson either. They were simply smart enough to take him when he was there at #11. Look who got taken above him. OTOH, was Klay the best player on the board when they picked? No. He wasn't the second best player either.

GS also didn't tank to find Draymond Green. Or to find any of those guys (whom you underrate when you imagine all that "top ...guys heavy lifting") -- like GPII, w/o whom they would have had no shot at a title this year. Or Kevon Looney. Or Poole. Or Iguodala. Or Otto. Or Shaun Livingston a few years back. David lee.

In fact, the excellence that has driven them was demonstrated across the board: high picks, low picks, FAs, & trades.

Then there's Cleveland: having maybe the best player in the history of basketball be born in your neighborhood & being lucky enough to have the pick to use on him is not an example of "a star driven approach." Or even of "tanking" or forking over valuable assets for a star. It's an example of being lucky as hell: can you imagine another team having a different "approach" & passing on Lebron, b/c he didn't jibe with their strategy.

...I also don't think its a terrible idea to use future 1sts if an elite talent can be acquired....

How could that be a terrible idea? It's the way the world works. The more something is worth the more it costs to acquire.

But, how about this: you pay more to acquire a guy you think is an elite talent but who actually turns out not to be elite? Happens all the time.

The second option is harder because its literally like threading a needle since the impact of the game's best players can dwarf the solid contributions of a group playing well together. Certainly you can aim to build the next Detroit Pistons but that requires incredible skill & making right decision after right decision as a GM. ...

It's easy to mistake the way things happened to turn out with a series of "right" anythings. To see a strategy behind a result because it was a good result. I don't think it's like that very often.

...our depth is severely overrated here....

I'll say!

...So trading all of our 'depth' for something of actual value doesn't appear to be a terrible idea to me....

A trade isn't an "idea." It's an interaction between two sides, both of which apply intelligence to their decision-making. Hence, if you think such a trade would be a great deal for us, then you can be sure that the other side won't be interested in making that trade. Duh!

...So are you really telling me its nearly impossible to find the next Javale McGee, Oleksey Pecherov, Nick Young, Chris Singleton, Jan Vesely, Rui Hachimura, Corey Kispert or Johnny Davis without 1st round picks???

That's quite a murderers row of R1 picks you list (maybe more "die laughing" than "murderers row" actually...?). But, I'm not sure I get the point of it. I.e. you leave out John Wall, Bradley Beal & Otto Porter.

Moreover, when we traded away our R1 picks in 2016 & 2017, how'd that work out?

There are a lot of ways to be a bad FO. &, if you're not a good enough FO to make positive draft picks, why would anyone think you're a good enough FO to make lop-sidedly positive trades?

[payitforward]

Trading depth for stars is great. But trading 5 years of future lotto picks is a really bad idea. That depth won't be so easily replaceable with no draft picks.

In this hypothetical situation, if we have 2 near stars, chances are we will be middle of the pack team, and that means a mid-round pick. Our front office have not shown the capability of making great mid-round 1 picks, as we are not as good as some other teams at evaluating and identifying the types of college or foreign talent on which to roll the dice. So these mid round picks are not as valuable to the Wizards as they may be to other teams. Our current front office strength is in identifying NBA quality players on cheap deals for trade....

No FO has the capability of making consistently great mid-round 1 picks. In fact, no FO has the capability of making consistently great picks even from 1-3. All you have to do is look at the history.

How many mid-round 1 picks have we made in the last 10 years? Two -- & both guys are still in the league

Nor does our FO have any particular ability to identify "NBA quality players on cheap deals for trade." Gafford is an example. Of course, if we'd traded away the mid-round 1 pick that got us the player we exchanged for Gafford, then that deal isn't there.

...Therefore, trading future picks is not a bad idea for this team.
We should trade 5 future 1st round picks in the right deal. ...

I can't imagine a deal that would be "right" in the sense of being worth 5 future R1 picks.