Looks like most teams want to stay put:
Melo said he wants to stay in NYC, the Bucks denied they want to trade Monroe, Hawks ask too much for Horford's expiring, Jennings is not going to Brooklyn (For all trade rumours see this article:
http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2016/2/15/10922512/nba-trade-rumors-list-deadline-tracker-2016)
Front offices are reluctant for good reasons: in the East several teams have finally found good chemistry after struggling for years (Detroit being the best example) and don't want to make radical changes.
Moreover, with a huge Free Agency this summer, everyone wants to have a flexible cap space to sign new players.
Still, there are several teams that are p desperate to make trades: Cavs (assuming they want to keep alive the hope of a championship), Knicks (their team payroll is awful due to Melo and Calderon).
And many of the mediocre teams in the West:
- Utah needs to reach a decision about which rookies it will keep long term
- Minny wants to get rid of Rubio
- Suns are ready to press the restart button
- Houston wants to get rid of Howard (can't blame them}
I've been following the rumours as closely as I could, and my feeling is that Danny is ready to sacrifice the Nets pick only for young and super talented players like Hayward or Love, who are good fits in our system.
Not for an expiring like Horford; nor a player who despite being an immediate upgrade is not of All Star calibre (Greg Monroe). And certainly not for ageing players like Melo or Howard on big contracts.
So, unless we reach an agreement for the likes of Hayward or Love, a massive trade could be our best scenario: in this case we could act as facilitators for other teams thanks to our cap space and draft picks (we have a lot more than we can use). If lucky we could get a serviceable bench player by sacrificing a few picks of lesser value and getting rid of Lee at the same time.