Mandatory Gordon Hayward trade (your ideas)

[Roy H.]

Have to agree with Roy. There is no way Milwaukee trades the 2 time MVP for T.J. Warren, someone you yourself called a frustrating disappointment in Turner, two Boston youth who could develop into nothing and 5 1st rounders where 4 of them would be 26 and lower.

That's just awful return for trading a 2 time MVP and current DPOY in Giannis nevermind also having to give up Dougie McDermott and possibly a current All-Defense center in Brook Lopez.

Again, I'd suggest you compare that trade package with others that teams have received for their superstars. It's right within the same range.

The only trade I would compare it to would be for Anthony Davis since he is the only player of the quality of Giannis.

For Davis the Pels got 2 former #2 picks still on their rookie contracts and younger than 22(Ingram and Ball) with massive upside, another decent youngster in Josh Hart, the #4 pick in the draft, the Lakers 2021 pick, an unprotected swap in 2023 when Lebron could be long gone or not good, the Lakers 2024 pick and an unprotected swap in 2025. Ingram has already developed into a better player than anyone in your trade scenario going to Milwaukee.

That blows your offer out of the water. Those two swaps and the 2024 pick could be pure gold. Look no farther than the Celtics-Nets trade for proof of that. Compare that to your offer of 4 picks at  26 or lower. Plus they got a #4 pick in a decent draft, not a #14 pick in a weak draft.

Sorry but comparing it to the Davis trade, your offer doesn't come close.

That really depends on how you describe the offer. Ball might have been a number 2 pick, but he had been a major disappointment until that point. Ingram was a great pickup there, but there were questions (and continue to be questions) about his ability to contribute to his team winning games. Josh Hart is a good rotation prospect. The other picks are detailed in my post above.

No one has ever gotten quite what the Pelicans got for Davis, partially because the Pelicans had all the leverage. The Lakers needed to get a deal done to pair him with James because of James' age. If the Bucks needed to trade Giannis, then they would have very little leverage.

Agree to disagree.  You’re talking about trading the best player in the NBA, in his prime, for a package that doesn’t include even one player that reasonably projects as an all-star. and with no premium picks.

I don’t think that T.J. Warren is in the same class of player as Oladipo or SGA, both of whom were more well-rounded.  Regardless, though, there’s a gigantic gap between Giannis and Paul George.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Have to agree with Roy. There is no way Milwaukee trades the 2 time MVP for T.J. Warren, someone you yourself called a frustrating disappointment in Turner, two Boston youth who could develop into nothing and 5 1st rounders where 4 of them would be 26 and lower.

That's just awful return for trading a 2 time MVP and current DPOY in Giannis nevermind also having to give up Dougie McDermott and possibly a current All-Defense center in Brook Lopez.

Again, I'd suggest you compare that trade package with others that teams have received for their superstars. It's right within the same range.

The only trade I would compare it to would be for Anthony Davis since he is the only player of the quality of Giannis.

For Davis the Pels got 2 former #2 picks still on their rookie contracts and younger than 22(Ingram and Ball) with massive upside, another decent youngster in Josh Hart, the #4 pick in the draft, the Lakers 2021 pick, an unprotected swap in 2023 when Lebron could be long gone or not good, the Lakers 2024 pick and an unprotected swap in 2025. Ingram has already developed into a better player than anyone in your trade scenario going to Milwaukee.

That blows your offer out of the water. Those two swaps and the 2024 pick could be pure gold. Look no farther than the Celtics-Nets trade for proof of that. Compare that to your offer of 4 picks at  26 or lower. Plus they got a #4 pick in a decent draft, not a #14 pick in a weak draft.

Sorry but comparing it to the Davis trade, your offer doesn't come close.

That really depends on how you describe the offer. Ball might have been a number 2 pick, but he had been a major disappointment until that point. Ingram was a great pickup there, but there were questions (and continue to be questions) about his ability to contribute to his team winning games. Josh Hart is a good rotation prospect. The other picks are detailed in my post above.

No one has ever gotten quite what the Pelicans got for Davis, partially because the Pelicans had all the leverage. The Lakers needed to get a deal done to pair him with James because of James' age. If the Bucks needed to trade Giannis, then they would have very little leverage.

No it doesn't depend on how you describe the offer. The offer is simply much, much better.

Those future picks could be very high drafts picks considering that in 2023, the year of the first swap, Lebron will either be a 39 year old player or retired. By the time the 2025 swap comes around Lebron will be 41 or retired. And that's assuming Lebron stays a Laker. Those picks are infinitely better than four picks at 26 and below.

Then you question Ingram's ability to affect winning but the 22 year old just posted numbers similar to Jayson Tatum's, won Most Improved Player on a team that improved its winning percentage while having it's best player only play 24 games. And the team the year before whose winning percentage this year's Pelicans improved on had a top 3 player in the league. Ingram is already better and affects winning better than Turner or Warren.

Maybe we have to agree to disagree as there is no way you are going to convince me that your proposal is on par with what the Pels got for Davis.

And I am not even going to consider the packages for George or Butler. They aren't even close to the quality of player of Giannis or Davis.  As for the Kawhi trade, San Antonio got a horrid return mostly due to Kawhi's injury. If San Antonio tried to trade him after his 2016-17 year, the value they would have gotten back would probably looked more like the Davis value.

I guess I disagree on the Lakers' trade package, but again, the reason they were able to get that much was because the Pelicans had the leverage. The Lakers trade package was better than any a team has ever gotten. If that's the ceiling and the floor for an MVP talent going into the last year of his deal is the Leonard trade, then I'd argue the deal is well within that range, depending on what the Bucks want.

I also disagree on Ingram. He did get much better this last year, but till that point, he was as effective as Andrew Wiggins on both sides of the court, and there was starting to be questions about whether he would ever be more.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Have to agree with Roy. There is no way Milwaukee trades the 2 time MVP for T.J. Warren, someone you yourself called a frustrating disappointment in Turner, two Boston youth who could develop into nothing and 5 1st rounders where 4 of them would be 26 and lower.

That's just awful return for trading a 2 time MVP and current DPOY in Giannis nevermind also having to give up Dougie McDermott and possibly a current All-Defense center in Brook Lopez.

Again, I'd suggest you compare that trade package with others that teams have received for their superstars. It's right within the same range.

The only trade I would compare it to would be for Anthony Davis since he is the only player of the quality of Giannis.

For Davis the Pels got 2 former #2 picks still on their rookie contracts and younger than 22(Ingram and Ball) with massive upside, another decent youngster in Josh Hart, the #4 pick in the draft, the Lakers 2021 pick, an unprotected swap in 2023 when Lebron could be long gone or not good, the Lakers 2024 pick and an unprotected swap in 2025. Ingram has already developed into a better player than anyone in your trade scenario going to Milwaukee.

That blows your offer out of the water. Those two swaps and the 2024 pick could be pure gold. Look no farther than the Celtics-Nets trade for proof of that. Compare that to your offer of 4 picks at  26 or lower. Plus they got a #4 pick in a decent draft, not a #14 pick in a weak draft.

Sorry but comparing it to the Davis trade, your offer doesn't come close.

That really depends on how you describe the offer. Ball might have been a number 2 pick, but he had been a major disappointment until that point. Ingram was a great pickup there, but there were questions (and continue to be questions) about his ability to contribute to his team winning games. Josh Hart is a good rotation prospect. The other picks are detailed in my post above.

No one has ever gotten quite what the Pelicans got for Davis, partially because the Pelicans had all the leverage. The Lakers needed to get a deal done to pair him with James because of James' age. If the Bucks needed to trade Giannis, then they would have very little leverage.

Agree to disagree.  You’re talking about trading the best player in the NBA, in his prime, for a package that doesn’t include even one player that reasonably projects as an all-star. and with no premium picks.

I don’t think that T.J. Warren is in the same class of player as Oladipo or SGA, both of whom were more well-rounded.  Regardless, though, there’s a gigantic gap between Giannis and Paul George.

We can agree to disagree. I will say that I'm not sure you understood my comparisons in the trade package post on the last page. I didn't compare Warren to Oladipo or SGA. Warren is a starting-caliber wing in the NBA, nothing more and nothing less. He's a bit more like Gallinari in the George deal or Covington in the Butler deal. Most trades for stars include at least one starting caliber player back to fill the position lost.

Also, I don't think its out of the question that Turner, with a change of scenery, could be an all-star once or twice in his career. As I've already argued, he's a top 3 defensive rim protector in the NBA right now. If a coach could unlock his offense a bit more, he'd get more consideration for all-star games. For example, imagine him in the Lopez role.

[johnnygreen]

Have to agree with Roy. There is no way Milwaukee trades the 2 time MVP for T.J. Warren, someone you yourself called a frustrating disappointment in Turner, two Boston youth who could develop into nothing and 5 1st rounders where 4 of them would be 26 and lower.

That's just awful return for trading a 2 time MVP and current DPOY in Giannis nevermind also having to give up Dougie McDermott and possibly a current All-Defense center in Brook Lopez.

Again, I'd suggest you compare that trade package with others that teams have received for their superstars. It's right within the same range.

The only trade I would compare it to would be for Anthony Davis since he is the only player of the quality of Giannis.

For Davis the Pels got 2 former #2 picks still on their rookie contracts and younger than 22(Ingram and Ball) with massive upside, another decent youngster in Josh Hart, the #4 pick in the draft, the Lakers 2021 pick, an unprotected swap in 2023 when Lebron could be long gone or not good, the Lakers 2024 pick and an unprotected swap in 2025. Ingram has already developed into a better player than anyone in your trade scenario going to Milwaukee.

That blows your offer out of the water. Those two swaps and the 2024 pick could be pure gold. Look no farther than the Celtics-Nets trade for proof of that. Compare that to your offer of 4 picks at  26 or lower. Plus they got a #4 pick in a decent draft, not a #14 pick in a weak draft.

Sorry but comparing it to the Davis trade, your offer doesn't come close.

When trading a superstar, that team never receives equal value. That Lakers trade you mentioned, also looks like garbage depending on your point of view. While Ingram and Ball have upside, the reality is they have been disappointing compared to their projections. Josh Hart was a throw in for salary. Those picks could be total garbage if Davis signs an extension. There is no way the Lakers have a worse record, when a swap is in question. And the remaining Lakers picks, will most likely be at best in the 18-20 range, and probably closer to 22-26.

Also, the Lakers had to pay a premium, once Davis mentioned he would only sign an extension with the Lakers. The discount some teams receive in trade discussions for star players on the final year of their contracts, was out the door for the Lakers, because Davis couldn't keep his mouth shut.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I'll just bring it down a bit from my pie-in-the-sky idea.

The truth is that even if the Bucks were interested in trading Giannis (unlikely), they probably hang up the phone if Brown is off the table.

The secondary truth is that the Celtics probably don't make a trade for Giannis without clearing one of Tatum, Brown, Smart, or Walker's future salary commitments in the process.

As a fan, I love Jaylen Brown and I don't want to trade him. I think he will continue to get better as an NBA player every year until his late 20s. I think Tatum could get into MVP conversation over the next few years. I don't want to trade him. It's bad form to trade Walker if you talk so much about culture and leadership. Smart is the perfect complimentary piece.

Let's just wait and see if we have a championship-quality team this year. If we do, no trades necessary. If we fall flat, maybe that will show us something about our roster that could help with future team building.

[jambr380]

In trading for Giannis, there is no way we acquire him w/o at least giving up Brown. DWC is doing his best to explain his points, but I think people are a lot lower on Turner than he thinks. I will agree that Ingram breaking out this year was a best case scenario. There were questions about whether he would ever play again with the blood clot issue. Ingram working out as well as he did is similar to how Oladipo/Sabonis worked out for Indy and Marc Gasol worked out for MEM back in the day. All wonderful surprises that made the receiving teams very happy.

However, while Turner has the ability to impact the game on both sides of the floor, he has probably mostly reached his ceiling. Warren might actually be the prize of that trade for many teams. And, obviously, Jaylen blows both of them out of the water. No way we do that trade w/o a commitment from Giannis, though.

Edit: lol - DWC with all the Brown talk while I was typing my post. TP for being more reasonable.

[Roy H.]

Also, the Lakers had to pay a premium, once Davis mentioned he would only sign an extension with the Lakers.

Can you explain your reasoning to me here?  Your argument seems counter-intuitive.  Limiting the market would seemingly drive the price down, not up.

Dell Demps got as much as he could, and waited to trade him, but in the end NOP knew its options were a deal with the Lakers or nothing. 

[keevsnick]

Also, the Lakers had to pay a premium, once Davis mentioned he would only sign an extension with the Lakers.

Can you explain your reasoning to me here?  Your argument seems counter-intuitive.  Limiting the market would seemingly drive the price down, not up.

I think it works both ways. Saying you're only signing with the Lakers limits the market of other teams, but it also means the Lakers have to pay for more than one year of AD. The price you are willing to give is different 1 year AD vs AD resigning.

[footey]

Also, the Lakers had to pay a premium, once Davis mentioned he would only sign an extension with the Lakers.

Can you explain your reasoning to me here?  Your argument seems counter-intuitive.  Limiting the market would seemingly drive the price down, not up.

I think it works both ways. Saying you're only signing with the Lakers limits the market of other teams, but it also means the Lakers have to pay for more than one year of AD. The price you are willing to give is different 1 year AD vs AD resigning.

Pels got decent value under the circumstances. Compare it to what Spurs got for Kawhi. Both had a year left on their contracts.

[BitterJim]

Also, the Lakers had to pay a premium, once Davis mentioned he would only sign an extension with the Lakers.

Can you explain your reasoning to me here?  Your argument seems counter-intuitive.  Limiting the market would seemingly drive the price down, not up.

I think it works both ways. Saying you're only signing with the Lakers limits the market of other teams, but it also means the Lakers have to pay for more than one year of AD. The price you are willing to give is different 1 year AD vs AD resigning.

I would disagree with that. It might mean that the Lakers would be willing to pay more for AD (and the Pelicans could try to take advantage of that), but it also might mean that the Lakers are unwilling to pay more (if they think they could just sign him in free agency the following summer). From the Pelicans perspective, the best option is just taking the best deal available

[johnnygreen]

Also, the Lakers had to pay a premium, once Davis mentioned he would only sign an extension with the Lakers.

Can you explain your reasoning to me here?  Your argument seems counter-intuitive.  Limiting the market would seemingly drive the price down, not up.

Dell Demps got as much as he could, and waited to trade him, but in the end NOP knew its options were a deal with the Lakers or nothing.

I understand what your saying, and I would generally agree. Normally, a team trading a player with only one year remaining, seemingly takes a discount because of the unknown by the other team if the player will sign an extension. However, in this case, the Lakers knew he would sign an extension without ever talking to him before the trade. In my mind, that "discount" no longer existed. When I mentioned premium, it was more meant toward not receiving that "discount".

Also, New Orleans was well aware of the Lakers time line with a 35 year old LeBron. So waiting a year later for Davis to hit free agency, was not really an ideal option, especially when they don't know how much longer LeBron will play. Also, by trading for AD, didn't the Lakers preserve his Bird rights? For someone like AD, that means a massive amount of money, and shows a commitment by the Lakers to him.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Also, the Lakers had to pay a premium, once Davis mentioned he would only sign an extension with the Lakers.

Can you explain your reasoning to me here?  Your argument seems counter-intuitive.  Limiting the market would seemingly drive the price down, not up.

I think it works both ways. Saying you're only signing with the Lakers limits the market of other teams, but it also means the Lakers have to pay for more than one year of AD. The price you are willing to give is different 1 year AD vs AD resigning.

Pels got decent value under the circumstances. Compare it to what Spurs got for Kawhi. Both had a year left on their contracts.

Pels got the best value anyone has every gotten under those circumstances. That's the ceiling of what a team can hope for when trading a superstar. The Spurs incoming trade package for Kawhi is the floor.

[Jvalin]

With all due respect, you guys live in fantasy land. Again, Giannis wants to stay in Milwaukee. He literally said that he will not ask for a trade and he'll do whatever he can to help his team win games. The Bucks have zero incentive to trade him.

It’s not happening. That’s not happening (=he won't ask for a trade). Some see a wall and go in [another direction]. I plow through it. We just have to get better as a team, individually and get right back at it next season. If winning a championship was easy, everyone would have one. We lost. Everyone saw that we lost. It’s disappointing, but what are we going to do? We’re going to keep working. I’ve got confidence in my teammates. Everyone has a role to play. You see my brother, Thanasis, he’s always up cheering and doing whatever he can when he’s not playing. I’m no different. This is a team and I’m going to do whatever I can to help our team win games.

https://twitter.com/ChrisBHaynes/status/1303536725667569666

[Roy H.]

With all due respect, you guys live in fantasy land. Again, Giannis wants to stay in Milwaukee. He literally said that he will not ask for a trade and he'll do whatever he can to help his team win games.

Boston Celtics point guard Kyrie Irving pre-emptively squashed the drama that was sure to accompany his impending free agency.

According to Turner Sports' Kristen Ledlow, Irving told fans in attendance during Thursday night's tip-off event at TD Garden that he plans to be in Boston for the long haul.

"I'm planning on re-signing here next year," he said.

Citing sources, The Athletic's Shams Charania reported Irving "has also communicated with Boston ownership over past several weeks and verbally committed plans to stay long-term."

Don’t believe everything that you read.  I have no idea what Giannis will do, but you can’t take his words at face value.

[SparzWizard]

With all due respect, you guys live in fantasy land. Again, Giannis wants to stay in Milwaukee. He literally said that he will not ask for a trade and he'll do whatever he can to help his team win games.

Boston Celtics point guard Kyrie Irving pre-emptively squashed the drama that was sure to accompany his impending free agency.

According to Turner Sports' Kristen Ledlow, Irving told fans in attendance during Thursday night's tip-off event at TD Garden that he plans to be in Boston for the long haul.

"I'm planning on re-signing here next year," he said.

Citing sources, The Athletic's Shams Charania reported Irving "has also communicated with Boston ownership over past several weeks and verbally committed plans to stay long-term."

Don’t believe everything that you read.  I have no idea what Giannis will do, but you can’t take his words at face value.

True. Don't believe anything what the player says until free agency and he inks the contract with ya. Kyrie was definitely a heartbreaker but I'm glad we got Kemba Walker in return, who is proud to be a Celtics.