OT: The Giannis trade rumors will "probably" start in earnest now

[MalagaBulls]

He is now "open" to exploring options outside of Milwaukee. I peg the Bulls odds as the same as our lottery chances - 1.7%.
Having said that, there isn't a terrible deal known to man that AKME wouldn't jump on to kickstart the franchise "according to his often delusional roadmap".

Have at it if it perks your interest.

Read on Twitter

[sco]

Won't be here...

I could see LAL, DEN, NYK, SAS, HOU, or OKC making something happen. We don't really have the assets.

[Andi Obst]

Won't be here...

I could see LAL, DEN, NYK, SAS, HOU, or OKC making something happen. We don't really have the assets.

While I agree that Giannis will absolutely not end up in Chicago, the Lakers certainly don't have the assets either (and I doubt the Bucks plan to hire Nico Harrison). And Denver has absolutely zero assets (Jokic doesn't make sense, obviously). A Knicks offer would have to be centered on players going back, don't know how interested the Bucks would be in that.

My money would be on the Spurs. Combination of good picks (not just their own, too) and young talent (Castle winning ROY helps a lot here). Would be an amazing fit too.

[kodo]

Won't be here...

I could see LAL, DEN, NYK, SAS, HOU, or OKC making something happen. We don't really have the assets.

I don't think LA has tradeable picks because 25, 27, 29 are all traded and the even years would fall under Stepien?
Denver no picks til '31.
Knicks traded most of their movable picks for Mikal, I think they do have 2026 but not sure if it's Stepien tradeable.

[MrSparkle]

It’s funny to think that OKC, SAS, HOU can pick up Giannis without really giving up their top rotation.

[MalagaBulls]

Won't be here...

I could see LAL, DEN, NYK, SAS, HOU, or OKC making something happen. We don't really have the assets.

That's why the odds are about as good as us winning the "Cooper Flagg" sweepstakes. But if you want to throw sh** at the wall this would be an offer:

2025, 27, & 29 FRP's
2026 & 2028 swaps
PWill 18M
Huerter 17.9M
Jalen Smith 9M
Ayo 7.5
= 52.4M
for Giannis 54M

That's the absolute bare minimum that would get you a seat at the kid's table, which equates to that 1.7% odds.

Your are left with an interesting rotation of 8:

Giannis - 4
Buzelis - 3
Giddey - 1
Coby - 2
Collins - 5
Lonzo
Terry
Philips

Vuc is also out as a trade piece, possibly for a 2025 FRP, or a protected 2026 pick.

[JustBuzzin]

I know everyone thinks OKC/Houston/San Antonio

But there is a giant sleeper nobody is talking about Boston!

Tatum for Giannis


Yeah I said it.

[MrSparkle]

I know everyone thinks OKC/Houston/San Antonio

But there is a giant sleeper nobody is talking about Boston!

Tatum for Giannis


Yeah I said it.

Nah. Milwaukee would have a worse team. Not unless Boston included a bunch of FRPs.

[waffle]

I bet we're surprised by where he ends up...

Making the money work is the hardest part.

he would be an AMAZING fit for us but can't see how ....

[dougthonus]

Giannis isn't coming here.

1: We don't have the assets to make the best offer

2: We have no hope of being better than Milwaukee is today after whatever our most reasonable Giannis offer is (ie, the reason Giannis will consider leaving Milwaukee will be equally true here)

We lose on both sides of the equation that you need to win on.

[sco]

Giannis isn't coming here.

1: We don't have the assets to make the best offer

2: We have no hope of being better than Milwaukee is today after whatever our most reasonable Giannis offer is (ie, the reason Giannis will consider leaving Milwaukee will be equally true here)

We lose on both sides of the equation that you need to win on.

What we do have are picks and expirings, while likely not enough to land him, may be useful to bring back an asset in a 3 way deal.

[kodo]

I know everyone thinks OKC/Houston/San Antonio

But there is a giant sleeper nobody is talking about Boston!

Tatum for Giannis

Yeah I said it.

Nah. Milwaukee would have a worse team. Not unless Boston included a bunch of FRPs.

And Boston's future draft picks are effectively worthless with Giannis on the team (or even without). Even if Giannis was open to it, Milwaukee has zero reason to make that trade. Tatum is obviously hugely valuable but Tatum + Kuzma doesn't even win the 48 games they did this year.

Giannis doesn't have a PO til 27/28, Milwaukee can still wait for better offers than likely a bunch of 30th picks. I think this thing will take a while and Giannis can play another season in MIL.

[dougthonus]

What we do have are picks and expirings, while likely not enough to land him, may be useful to bring back an asset in a 3 way deal.

Maybe.

I'm certainly not opposed to acquiring Giannis, I just don't think it's realistic on either end (him wanting to come here or us paying enough).

In terms of helping facilitate a deal, I don't know that I'd be excited to send picks out in any way to bring in an asset. I just want us to stop sending picks out to bring in assets to chase 9th some more, but it's hard to say that definitively without knowing what type of asset would come.

I'd be happy to add in expiring and get paid for taking on salary by getting some picks. I'd do that in any deal, not just this one. Hard to say how likely that is or isn't to be a need. I'd guess Milwaukee wants a lot of financial relief if they are moving Giannis, but that probably comes at a 3rd team facilitating with cap room and not with expirings, but the Bulls have a 26M dollar trade exception via the LaVine trade they could leverage to help that get accomplished.

The challenge is that they will likely need to stay under the tax while leveraging it, which will potentially be challenging with the Giddey extension coming. I've got the Bulls at around 17M under the tax with a 30M extension for Giddey on the books, so you can back into how much we can help while avoiding the tax depending on how expensive you think Giddey will be.

--- edit ---

Looked up Milwaukee's cap situation, and they aren't going to be in the tax, so don't have any real need to shed salary. They probably are more likely to want to take on extra salary if it gives them more assets rather than pay us to take some cash assets. I thought they might be deep in the tax, but not true.

[League Circles]

IMO this won't seriously get traction until at least next summer. I don't think any offers prior to then that don't include a young all star and/or a top 3 guaranteed pick will be entertained by Milwaukee. Giannis has 2 guaranteed years left still.

[Ctownbulls]

Never would work. They'd have to include Matas and they'd have no team left. There's no point.

[prolific passer]

Never would work. They'd have to include Matas and they'd have no team left. There's no point.

Yeah. Gonna have to gut the roster to get him.

[dougthonus]

IMO this won't seriously get traction until at least next summer. I don't think any offers prior to then that don't include a young all star and/or a top 3 guaranteed pick will be entertained by Milwaukee. Giannis has 2 guaranteed years left still.

History says that when a star asks out (and this seems like it might signal a soft ask) that they're mostly moved right away. From Milwaukee's perspective, I'm without Lillard this next year already, so I'm probably completely screwed from competing next year with Giannis.

You're question then is really do you get more for Giannis now or in a year, and the answer to that is probably now, because a team that might take him with 2 years on his deal that might require Giannis to agree to an extension if it was only one year (increased market), plus the receiving team gets Giannis for longer at an earlier age.

[sco]

IMO this won't seriously get traction until at least next summer. I don't think any offers prior to then that don't include a young all star and/or a top 3 guaranteed pick will be entertained by Milwaukee. Giannis has 2 guaranteed years left still.

History says that when a star asks out (and this seems like it might signal a soft ask) that they're mostly moved right away. From Milwaukee's perspective, I'm without Lillard this next year already, so I'm probably completely screwed from competing next year with Giannis.

You're question then is really do you get more for Giannis now or in a year, and the answer to that is probably now, because a team that might take him with 2 years on his deal that might require Giannis to agree to an extension if it was only one year (increased market), plus the receiving team gets Giannis for longer at an earlier age.

Plus another year of tanking, if that's the preferred route.

[League Circles]

IMO this won't seriously get traction until at least next summer. I don't think any offers prior to then that don't include a young all star and/or a top 3 guaranteed pick will be entertained by Milwaukee. Giannis has 2 guaranteed years left still.

History says that when a star asks out (and this seems like it might signal a soft ask) that they're mostly moved right away. From Milwaukee's perspective, I'm without Lillard this next year already, so I'm probably completely screwed from competing next year with Giannis.

You're question then is really do you get more for Giannis now or in a year, and the answer to that is probably now, because a team that might take him with 2 years on his deal that might require Giannis to agree to an extension if it was only one year (increased market), plus the receiving team gets Giannis for longer at an earlier age.

Hard to say, when's the last time that arguably the best player on earth asked out with 2+ years left on his deal, in his prime, without injury issues? This may be somewhat unprecedented territory.

At the end of the day, IMO, it would be crazy for them to trade him without at least one elite piece coming back, regardless of the potential for him to leave in 2 years (for a paycut). The conversation starts IMO with a young all star level player or a top 3 pick in this summer's draft.

[dougthonus]

Hard to say, when's the last time that arguably the best player on earth asked out with 2+ years left on his deal, in his prime, without injury issues? This may be somewhat unprecedented territory.

Agreed it is unprecedented. I'm just thinking that if I'm Milwaukee, I already know this year is a lost cause, so I'm aiming to get the best return rather than trying to convince him he should stay after playing a season with an absolute trash roster. You know already he's not going to feel better about the situation next season.

At the end of the day, IMO, it would be crazy for them to trade him without at least one elite piece coming back, regardless of the potential for him to leave in 2 years (for a paycut). The conversation starts IMO with a young all star level player or a top 3 pick in this summer's draft.

I'm sure they will aim to get the most they can. Who knows what that is. If I were the Thunder, I'd probably be willing to give up Chet + matching salary + 10 1st round picks for Giannis.