Would you trade for Giannis Antetokounmpo?

[vjcsmoke]

So maybe the Bucks could be convinced to trade Giannis if he doesn't sign an extension.

So would you do this trade with Milwaukee?  Keep in mind we'd probably have to sweeten this package with 2 or 3 1st rounders as well.

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=y3pkwm2x

To make salaries match:
Giannis Antetokounmpo, Brook Lopez, and T Antetokounmpo for Gordon Hayward, Marcus Smart, Romeo Langford + multiple 1st round picks.

This is essentially an Anthony Davis level offer with the hope that we could convince Giannis to sign an extension in Boston after the trade.

A big three of Giannis, Tatum, and Brown should handily win the East.  If you were DA, would you do it.  If you are the Bucks and Giannis informs you he is not extending, would you do it?

PS Article outlining why Bucks might trade Giannis this offseason: https://sportsnaut.com/nba-rumors-most-realistic-giannis-antetokounmpo-trade-scenarios/

Quote: “If he doesn’t sign the (supermax) this offseason, I think the Bucks have to look at exploring the trade market,” one Eastern Conference executive said, via Chris Haynes of Yahoo! Sports.

[Roy H.]

It would take Brown or Tatum.  I suspect all of us would give up Smart and Hayward in a second.

[Somebody]

I would trade Tatum for Giannis tbh. Giannis would upgrade almost everything that Tatum brings to the table imo (only exception is shooting, but when you have Giannis you get shooters around him instead of getting him to shoot).

[Moranis]

There is no way the proposed trade is anywhere near good enough value for Giannis.  I don't care if you add 10 unprotected 1st's, not enough value.  It will take Tatum, maybe even Tatum and Brown to acquire Giannis from Milwaukee.

[tazzmaniac]

There is no way the proposed trade is anywhere near good enough value for Giannis.  I don't care if you add 10 unprotected 1st's, not enough value.  It will take Tatum, maybe even Tatum and Brown to acquire Giannis from Milwaukee.

That's ridiculous.  If Giannis declines the supermax, you'd be trading for a 1 year rental.  The Spurs could only get Derozen for Kawhi when he was a 1 year rental. 

[pearljammer10]

I mean, calling this idea a fantasy is an understatement.

Bucks would ask for Tatum and Brown in the package.

Obviously I’d love Giannis but if he were to come here, he wouldn’t be surrounding both of Tatum in Brown. It just won’t happen.

[Somebody]

There is no way the proposed trade is anywhere near good enough value for Giannis.  I don't care if you add 10 unprotected 1st's, not enough value.  It will take Tatum, maybe even Tatum and Brown to acquire Giannis from Milwaukee.

Giannis isn't going anywhere this offseason anyways. I think Tatum on a max extension for Giannis next offseason assuming that Giannis wants to leave Milwaukee would be good value for both sides.

[gouki88]

There is no way the proposed trade is anywhere near good enough value for Giannis.  I don't care if you add 10 unprotected 1st's, not enough value.  It will take Tatum, maybe even Tatum and Brown to acquire Giannis from Milwaukee.

That's absolutely ridiculous. You only have to look at the recent trade packages for MVP candidates like Anthony Davis, Kawhi and Paul George to realise that

[Somebody]

There is no way the proposed trade is anywhere near good enough value for Giannis.  I don't care if you add 10 unprotected 1st's, not enough value.  It will take Tatum, maybe even Tatum and Brown to acquire Giannis from Milwaukee.

That's absolutely ridiculous. You only have to look at the recent trade packages for MVP candidates like Anthony Davis, Kawhi and Paul George to realise that

To be fair only Davis is on Giannis' level, and didn't the Lakers trade Ingram, Lonzo, Hart and 5-7 1sts for him?

[gouki88]

There is no way the proposed trade is anywhere near good enough value for Giannis.  I don't care if you add 10 unprotected 1st's, not enough value.  It will take Tatum, maybe even Tatum and Brown to acquire Giannis from Milwaukee.

That's absolutely ridiculous. You only have to look at the recent trade packages for MVP candidates like Anthony Davis, Kawhi and Paul George to realise that

To be fair only Davis is on Giannis' level, and didn't the Lakers trade Ingram, Lonzo, Hart and 5-7 1sts for him?

Ingram at that stage was worse than Brown is now, Lonzo is and was worse than Smart, Hart didn't have much value as an inefficient mediocre defending 3&D prospect, and those picks are LA's 2021 1st, LA's 2023 1st and LA's 2024 1st. So only 3 first round picks and worse players than we could offer.
 
An offer of Brown/Tatum, Smart, Langford, #14 and one future 1st blows that offer out of the water.

[Birdman]

Giannis is probably best player in NBA so yes but only if he signs a long term contract

[jambr380]

This has been discussed before. No way a Hayward/Smart/picks package gets this done, but also no way we would need to trade Tatum and Brown...or even Tatum.

The deal would likely be Brown and picks; or Brown, Smart, and picks. It really comes down to whether or not we would need to include Smart (I think we probably would), not if we need to include Tatum. If you look at trade packages out there, it really becomes difficult for teams to beat a Brown/Smart package and still remain relevant. If Giannis was able to have some input on where he would go (like AD), then going to a team with Tatum, Kemba, and Hayward would have to be right at the top of the list. No other team would still have three (or even two) all-star caliber players left after making a deal for Giannis.

[jambr380]

There is no way the proposed trade is anywhere near good enough value for Giannis.  I don't care if you add 10 unprotected 1st's, not enough value.  It will take Tatum, maybe even Tatum and Brown to acquire Giannis from Milwaukee.

That's absolutely ridiculous. You only have to look at the recent trade packages for MVP candidates like Anthony Davis, Kawhi and Paul George to realise that

To be fair only Davis is on Giannis' level, and didn't the Lakers trade Ingram, Lonzo, Hart and 5-7 1sts for him?

Ingram at that stage was worse than Brown is now, Lonzo is and was worse than Smart, Hart didn't have much value as an inefficient mediocre defending 3&D prospect, and those picks are LA's 2021 1st, LA's 2023 1st and LA's 2024 1st. So only 3 first round picks and worse players than we could offer.
 
An offer of Brown/Tatum, Smart, Langford, #14 and one future 1st blows that offer out of the water.

This can't be understated. While the deal looks much more reasonable now - at the time of the trade - there were still questions about whether or not Ingram would be able to continue his NBA career (blood clot issue). It reminds me of when people thought the LAL-MEM Gasol for Gasol deal was even because of how Marc turned out, even though he had just been selected at #48 in the draft. Not exactly the kind-of return you expect for an all-star like Pau.

[Birdman]

Brown/Smart/Langford for Giannis works in trade machine..I do this in a second but only if he signs long term...

[Moranis]

There is no way the proposed trade is anywhere near good enough value for Giannis.  I don't care if you add 10 unprotected 1st's, not enough value.  It will take Tatum, maybe even Tatum and Brown to acquire Giannis from Milwaukee.

That's absolutely ridiculous. You only have to look at the recent trade packages for MVP candidates like Anthony Davis, Kawhi and Paul George to realise that

To be fair only Davis is on Giannis' level, and didn't the Lakers trade Ingram, Lonzo, Hart and 5-7 1sts for him?

Ingram at that stage was worse than Brown is now, Lonzo is and was worse than Smart, Hart didn't have much value as an inefficient mediocre defending 3&D prospect, and those picks are LA's 2021 1st, LA's 2023 1st and LA's 2024 1st. So only 3 first round picks and worse players than we could offer.
 
An offer of Brown/Tatum, Smart, Langford, #14 and one future 1st blows that offer out of the water.

It was 4, Ingram, Ball, Hart, 2021, 2023 (swap rights), 2024 or 2025.  You are forgetting about the 4th pick in the draft.  Ball has more value than Smart, especially to a rebuilding team.

And Giannis is better than Davis.  After all he is the 2 time reigning league MVP and the defending DPOY.  Last time I checked Davis hasn't won any of those awards.  Giannis has also missed far fewer games and had far more team success than Davis had in NO (further suggesting Giannis is more valuable a player as a centerpiece).

Boston isn't acquiring Giannis without Tatum because Brown and a bunch of late first and role players isn't enough value and will be beaten by other offers from teams that have much better draft capital or more high level prospects.  If Giannis becomes available, it will take Tatum and other pieces for Boston to acquire him. 

EDIT: And let's think about potential trade packages for Giannis.  I mean there is the 2nd pick in the draft on a team that has some other solid assets and that would still be very good after acquiring Giannis (Thompson and 2 for Giannis makes sense on some level for both teams).  What about Jamal Murray and Michael Porter for Giannis?  Or 4, Carter, Markkanen, LaVine, and a bunch of a future 1st's (and then have max cap room to bring in whoever Giannis wants).  Philly could give up Simmons (and players like Thybulle, Smith, and future picks), that would be an interesting trade for both teams.  A trade centered around Siakam or Bam could also work.  If Giannis truly becomes available, there will be bidding wars.  Boston isn't acquiring him without Tatum.