Hawks trade #1 to Spurs for #4 and #8

[wemby]

Ok.

But, if you need the 1 to draft the guy you want, if you wait until draft night, you can't really make that trade after he's already gone at 1, ya know?

Like Snakebites says, if anything you should wait until ou have a more clear picture of who is going where, and the combine isn't even over, you have all the workouts and interviews to go through, gather intel, and a month and a half to make a decision if you fall in love with a prospect you fear will be gone by 4, which I don't think is likely the case. If we were talking a 2022 class kind of draft, I'd do 4+8 in a heartbeat because there was a clear tier break after 3, now it's a crapshoot who is better between Risacher/Buzelis/Cody Williams/Holland or Topic/Dillingham/Sheppard/Castle. That's 8 players who the Spurs are guaranteed to get 2 of, and likely it won't come to their last option since Sarr and Clingan are in that mix, maybe Knecht as well.

Sure. Add to the initial post "hypothetically, on June 15, SA has 3 guys they rate higher than the rest of the draft....and they offer 4/8 for 1...." etc.

Does that work now? I would assume, as Chuck is describing, that even if the players are relatively equal, that teams still have a preference, and probably would list guys 1-8, rather than just "all these guys are exactly equal as our top 8, and at draft pick 4, we'll just use a random number generator to get our guy...". And what if that top tier for them is just 3? Or 2? Or they think, while a lot of guys are equally talented, there's 2 that could REALLY fit us for what we want?

Because, I'm sure every person in the Spurs organization would be fired if they told you "the top 8 is a crapshoot". They will have strong opinions as to who they want, and in what order, by draft night.

I think a more fireable offense would be trading 4+8 for one, only to end up with the worse player at a higher salary. When in doubt, do nothing.

[Texas Chuck]

But the gap in the perceived value of those players is variable, right? Unless you think nobody ever trades down unless they’re sure they’re getting their top guy anyway.

It's definitely variable. But its not negligible. Not in the top of any draft. Which is what has been repeated a ton. I get a lot of it comes from fans with the magic draft tiers where all players are the same until the pick after ours. But it’s gone beyond that this year.

It’s not negligible, but in a draft like this it is probably smaller than the value of the 8th pick.

Ands assuming the Spurs preferred choice is even a guy likely to be picked in the top 3.

I don’t see the deal hitting the mark. And it’s not just about getting “2 bites at the apple” either. Teams in the lottery generally have multiple needs.

So we are clear, I don't know enough about how the Spurs value these players to say they should make this deal for sure. I'm just saying in general they are getting tremendous value here. But at this point its about specific players not theoretical draft value.

I just strongly disagree with the reason for not moving up being well all these guys are on a tier so we'll take whomever falls to us and be just as happy. They may not like a guy enough to use picks 4 and 8 on him and that's absolutely fair. But if this draft sucks, pick 8 shouldn't be seen as a big loss either. Hard for it go both ways really.

[wemby]

But the gap in the perceived value of those players is variable, right? Unless you think nobody ever trades down unless they’re sure they’re getting their top guy anyway.

It's definitely variable. But its not negligible. Not in the top of any draft. Which is what has been repeated a ton. I get a lot of it comes from fans with the magic draft tiers where all players are the same until the pick after ours. But it’s gone beyond that this year.

It’s not negligible, but in a draft like this it is probably smaller than the value of the 8th pick.

Ands assuming the Spurs preferred choice is even a guy likely to be picked in the top 3. This is a draft where every teams top 4 will diverge more than a typical draft.

I don’t see the deal hitting the mark. And it’s not just about getting “2 bites at the apple” either. Teams in the lottery generally have multiple needs.

I meant "2 bites at the apple" as in getting 2 shots at getting a future contributor, Spurs need more than one player and if they hit on a guard or a wing that's already a win.

[Scoot McGroot]

I think a more fireable offense would be trading 4+8 for one, only to end up with the worse player at a higher salary. When in doubt, do nothing.

That's more a statement that you think your team is terrible at scouting? Why would you end up with the worse player?

[wemby]

I think a more fireable offense would be trading 4+8 for one, only to end up with the worse player at a higher salary. When in doubt, do nothing.

That's more a statement that you think your team is terrible at scouting? Why would you end up with the worse player?

Because evaluations aren't deterministic in nature even if you're the best scout on the planet, otherwise everyone would get it right and no one would entertain the idea of trading down. Nothing that shouldn't be obvious when you take notice that the last 3 MVPs went 41 (Jokic), 3 (Embiid) and 15 (Giannis), and MVP candidates went 11 (SGA), 3 (Luka) and 15 (Kawhi). Only a very dumb scout would not consider the possibility of being wrong.

PS: Mavs scouts had Luka no. 2 behind Ayton, as per Cuban

[Scoot McGroot]

I think a more fireable offense would be trading 4+8 for one, only to end up with the worse player at a higher salary. When in doubt, do nothing.

That's more a statement that you think your team is terrible at scouting? Why would you end up with the worse player?

Because evaluations aren't deterministic in nature even if you're the best scout on the planet, otherwise everyone would get it right and no one would entertain the idea of trading down. Nothing that shouldn't be obvious when you take notice that the last 3 MVPs went 41 (Jokic), 3 (Embiid) and 15 (Giannis), and MVP candidates went 11 (SGA), 3 (Luka) and 15 (Kawhi). Only a very dumb scout would not consider the possibility of being wrong.

PS: Mavs scouts had Luka no. 2 behind Ayton, as per Cuban

So you're saying that because your "might" get it wrong, you shouldn't ever go for it? There's the obvious flip side to that coin. What if your scouts would've been right, but didn't trade up to 1 or 2 to get the guy they wanted, and that guy hits, but your 4/8 picks miss terribly?

But yeah, sometimes great players go later. That doesn't mean that you should trade down from 4/8 to 41 just because Jokic was once drafted there.

[tcheco]

I don't think there's any way the Spurs do this. The gap between 1 and 4 isn't large enough.

See, I think they’d be happy to. If his draft is as thin as is reported, then the only way to ensure you can get the one guy you think could be something is to draft number 1.

If SA thinks there’s 8 or so guys that are all pretty equal and could all equally help their ball club, then i’d agree with you.

i've read differently. That there's no stars but 1 to 15 could become decent starters, but no big difference comparing with top 3 and rest of the lottery being bellow them as most drafts

[tcheco]

That's more a statement that you think your team is terrible at scouting? Why would you end up with the worse player?

Because evaluations aren't deterministic in nature even if you're the best scout on the planet, otherwise everyone would get it right and no one would entertain the idea of trading down. Nothing that shouldn't be obvious when you take notice that the last 3 MVPs went 41 (Jokic), 3 (Embiid) and 15 (Giannis), and MVP candidates went 11 (SGA), 3 (Luka) and 15 (Kawhi). Only a very dumb scout would not consider the possibility of being wrong.

PS: Mavs scouts had Luka no. 2 behind Ayton, as per Cuban

So you're saying that because your "might" get it wrong, you shouldn't ever go for it? There's the obvious flip side to that coin. What if your scouts would've been right, but didn't trade up to 1 or 2 to get the guy they wanted, and that guy hits, but your 4/8 picks miss terribly?

But yeah, sometimes great players go later. That doesn't mean that you should trade down from 4/8 to 41 just because Jokic was once drafted there.

Do we know if any scouts see a big going from 4 to 1? That's where this draft is a bit different. If Spurs do know they can get a sure fire at 1, they should definitely do it, but seems like this year it's a bit different. I do wonder if people are just repeting themselves and there's actually a clear better player.

[Scoot McGroot]

Because evaluations aren't deterministic in nature even if you're the best scout on the planet, otherwise everyone would get it right and no one would entertain the idea of trading down. Nothing that shouldn't be obvious when you take notice that the last 3 MVPs went 41 (Jokic), 3 (Embiid) and 15 (Giannis), and MVP candidates went 11 (SGA), 3 (Luka) and 15 (Kawhi). Only a very dumb scout would not consider the possibility of being wrong.

PS: Mavs scouts had Luka no. 2 behind Ayton, as per Cuban

So you're saying that because your "might" get it wrong, you shouldn't ever go for it? There's the obvious flip side to that coin. What if your scouts would've been right, but didn't trade up to 1 or 2 to get the guy they wanted, and that guy hits, but your 4/8 picks miss terribly?

But yeah, sometimes great players go later. That doesn't mean that you should trade down from 4/8 to 41 just because Jokic was once drafted there.

Do we know if any scouts see a big going from 4 to 1? That's where this draft is a bit different. If Spurs do know they can get a sure fire at 1, they should definitely do it, but seems like this year it's a bit different. I do wonder if people are just repeting themselves and there's actually a clear better player.

Last year, there was a general thought that 2/3 were the same tier, and Portland should just be fine taking whomever Charlotte doesn't take. Would've made sense to trade up and get Miller instead of Scoot Henderson, if it were possible, no?

Even when there are tiers, there will still be guys you would RATHER have taken.

[Snakebites]

It's definitely variable. But its not negligible. Not in the top of any draft. Which is what has been repeated a ton. I get a lot of it comes from fans with the magic draft tiers where all players are the same until the pick after ours. But it’s gone beyond that this year.

It’s not negligible, but in a draft like this it is probably smaller than the value of the 8th pick.

Ands assuming the Spurs preferred choice is even a guy likely to be picked in the top 3.

I don’t see the deal hitting the mark. And it’s not just about getting “2 bites at the apple” either. Teams in the lottery generally have multiple needs.

So we are clear, I don't know enough about how the Spurs value these players to say they should make this deal for sure. I'm just saying in general they are getting tremendous value here. But at this point its about specific players not theoretical draft value.

I'm unclear on what you mean by "in general they're getting tremendous value". Value is a specific thing that depends on a specific situation. It depends entirely on their own valuation of the players available at each spot. So the only viable discussion WE can have, since we don't know how they value said players, is based on how we think WE'D value said players. That's really the only relevant way to discuss this on this forum.

I dunno, maybe I'm being obtuse here but I still don't quite get your point.

[Texas Chuck]

It’s not negligible, but in a draft like this it is probably smaller than the value of the 8th pick.

Ands assuming the Spurs preferred choice is even a guy likely to be picked in the top 3.

I don’t see the deal hitting the mark. And it’s not just about getting “2 bites at the apple” either. Teams in the lottery generally have multiple needs.

So we are clear, I don't know enough about how the Spurs value these players to say they should make this deal for sure. I'm just saying in general they are getting tremendous value here. But at this point its about specific players not theoretical draft value.

I'm unclear on what you mean by "in general they're getting tremendous value". Value is a specific thing that depends on a specific situation.

I dunno, maybe I'm being obtuse here but I still don't quite get your point.

Yeah cuz I suck at making my point.... What I am trying to say is that in basically any draft only paying 8 to get from 4 to 1 is just a huge value win. It would be the rare exception where you would not want to do that. The Anthony Bennett draft really the only draft that in real-time nobody thought there was an elite prospect available where you almost certainly wouldn't have.

This draft isn't as bad as that one was(at the time, not just with hindsight), but also lacks that typical clear #1 pick. And even in the Banchero draft where there wasn't consensus, there were 3 guys thought of as elite talents.

So this comes down to what the Spurs and Hawks think. If the Hawks love a guy, they shouldn't trade out period. But if they don't and the Spurs do, giving up 8(especially in what's considered a below average draft) is a bargain to get your guy.

And even if one though 1-4 were of roughly the same value, paying 8 in such a weak draft to take your 1st choice of them rather than settling for who the other 3 teams left for you isn't really overpaying.

So a deal happens based on a specific player. But in terms of value I have it favoring the Spurs pretty readily.

And if the idea is we want two picks now, cool. The Hawks would almost certainly prefer a package of #4 and a future asset anyway. There are reasons for the Spurs not to trade up, but value as constructed doesn't appear to be one of them.

[tcheco]

So you're saying that because your "might" get it wrong, you shouldn't ever go for it? There's the obvious flip side to that coin. What if your scouts would've been right, but didn't trade up to 1 or 2 to get the guy they wanted, and that guy hits, but your 4/8 picks miss terribly?

But yeah, sometimes great players go later. That doesn't mean that you should trade down from 4/8 to 41 just because Jokic was once drafted there.

Do we know if any scouts see a big going from 4 to 1? That's where this draft is a bit different. If Spurs do know they can get a sure fire at 1, they should definitely do it, but seems like this year it's a bit different. I do wonder if people are just repeting themselves and there's actually a clear better player.

Last year, there was a general thought that 2/3 were the same tier, and Portland should just be fine taking whomever Charlotte doesn't take. Would've made sense to trade up and get Miller instead of Scoot Henderson, if it were possible, no?

Even when there are tiers, there will still be guys you would RATHER have taken.

But we don't know if Portland scouts thought Miller would be better. And we are not even sure he will be better the next 10 years.

Like Philly shouldn't have traded up and chosen Fultz, it backfired, but their scouts were certain he was the pick, most people were.

In the end we are just playing a guess game

[CP War Hawks]

I have Sarr a tier to himself, not interested in 4 and 8 with the guys in this draft.

Lol every year we hear the same story on this board: that this is an [X]-player draft, where [X] is coincidentally the pick my favorite team has.

I know you boys still have Wiseman ptsd, but I trust my eval on this one.

[atlantabbq99]

I have Sarr a tier to himself, not interested in 4 and 8 with the guys in this draft.

Lol every year we hear the same story on this board: that this is an [X]-player draft, where [X] is coincidentally the pick my favorite team has.

I know you boys still have Wiseman ptsd, but I trust my eval on this one.

As far as i know, there is no injury history with Sarr

[Scoot McGroot]

Do we know if any scouts see a big going from 4 to 1? That's where this draft is a bit different. If Spurs do know they can get a sure fire at 1, they should definitely do it, but seems like this year it's a bit different. I do wonder if people are just repeting themselves and there's actually a clear better player.

Last year, there was a general thought that 2/3 were the same tier, and Portland should just be fine taking whomever Charlotte doesn't take. Would've made sense to trade up and get Miller instead of Scoot Henderson, if it were possible, no?

Even when there are tiers, there will still be guys you would RATHER have taken.

But we don't know if Portland scouts thought Miller would be better. And we are not even sure he will be better the next 10 years.

Like Philly shouldn't have traded up and chosen Fultz, it backfired, but their scouts were certain he was the pick, most people were.

In the end we are just playing a guess game

Sounds like we could save a lot of trouble and fire all the league scouts and just draft off consensus media big boards.

[Snakebites]

So we are clear, I don't know enough about how the Spurs value these players to say they should make this deal for sure. I'm just saying in general they are getting tremendous value here. But at this point its about specific players not theoretical draft value.

I'm unclear on what you mean by "in general they're getting tremendous value". Value is a specific thing that depends on a specific situation.

I dunno, maybe I'm being obtuse here but I still don't quite get your point.

Yeah cuz I suck at making my point.... What I am trying to say is that in basically any draft only paying 8 to get from 4 to 1 is just a huge value win. It would be the rare exception where you would not want to do that. The Anthony Bennett draft really the only draft that in real-time nobody thought there was an elite prospect available where you almost certainly wouldn't have.

This draft isn't as bad as that one was(at the time, not just with hindsight), but also lacks that typical clear #1 pick. And even in the Banchero draft where there wasn't consensus, there were 3 guys thought of as elite talents.

So this comes down to what the Spurs and Hawks think. If the Hawks love a guy, they shouldn't trade out period. But if they don't and the Spurs do, giving up 8(especially in what's considered a below average draft) is a bargain to get your guy.

And even if one though 1-4 were of roughly the same value, paying 8 in such a weak draft to take your 1st choice of them rather than settling for who the other 3 teams left for you isn't really overpaying.

So a deal happens based on a specific player. But in terms of value I have it favoring the Spurs pretty readily.

And if the idea is we want two picks now, cool. The Hawks would almost certainly prefer a package of #4 and a future asset anyway. There are reasons for the Spurs not to trade up, but value as constructed doesn't appear to be one of them.

I guess we'll agree to disagree then- I think its value is dependent on the players available.

2022 is an interesting example to bring up. Here, there was a clear top 3 pick. I seriously doubt the Thunder would have given up anything of value to go from 2 up to 1. Between 1 and 4 the value would have been huge, because the dropoff occurred between 3 and 4. You could say the same for 2021. I doubt the Pistons could have gotten much value trading to the second or third spots. Cade was a mild consensus, but wasn't seen as a totally different level prospect relative to Mobley or Green.

In 2023, of course, that was the most valuable number one pick we've seen in a long time. Even if the Hornets had somehow managed to acquire the 3rd, 4th, and 5th picks to package with the number 2 I doubt they could have gotten the Spurs to give that pick up. His value was THAT high. To say the difference between Wemby and Brandon Miller was only one draft spot wouldn't have really captured it. That one pick gap was a tremendous gulf, a gulf that didn't really exist between those same 2 spots the previous year.

Sure, it's fair to point out that in each of those cases the value between the first and fourth was substantial. But that's down to the talent distribution of those drafts. Each happened to have a clear talent gap between the third and fourth pick. I don't think that's a given though.

The value disparity between two picks depends on the talent distribution of the draft. It isn't automatic that one pick has X amount of value over another. Whether you think this draft is THAT bad I guess is subjective. But I'd much rather have 4 and 8 than one. If I'm the Spurs I'm not interested in Sarr and think it's entirely possible the guy I want is available at 4 anyway.

Anyways, I'm repeating myself. You clearly don't see it the way I do.

[One_and_Done]

Picks are non-fungible. They don't have a set value based on their number, only what is available for them.

[Geaux_Hawks]

Just for fun, i went ahead and compared #1 to #4 and #8 in the last five drafts...

Wembanyama vs Amen Thompson and Jarace Walker

Banchero vs Keegan Murray and Dyson Daniels

Cunningham vs Scottie Barnes and Franz Wagner

Anthony Edwards vs Patrick Williams and Obi Toppin

Zion vs DeAndr Hunter vs Jaxson Hayes

So ya LOL, no thanks.....

In this draft it's more like having the #10 or the #13 and #17. That's a better comparison.

Or just go back to the 2013 draft if you want a comparison of 1 vs 4 and 8.

Anthony Bennett or Cody Zeller and KCP.

Spurs would be out of their minds to do this. Draft is too flat.

See this is where I think people are overstating "weak draft". There's no Wemby/Zion/Simmons/AD of course, but I do believe there's far more upside than what 2013 had.

The 2012 freshman class was just very underwhelming as a whole. A lot of them didn't even declare for the draft. To boot, the upperclassmen were far from impressive.

This year, there's more guys that have the skills and abilities, but still need time to development more. Some have consistency questions. Some have concerns about there size limitations. It helps that the international class also has some talented guys coming over too.

To me, this years crop is more in line with 2020. 2020 had a similar issue in terms of no clear cut #1. There were plenty of casuals that didn't even recognize the top prospects. Yet 2020 has given us Ant, Hali, Melo Ball, and Maxey so far.

So I wouldn't take 4 and 8, but the reason behind it has more to do with me liking Sarr than it does not liking the idea of picking between the 13th and 17th best prospect in another draft. I think the 10th best prospect this year would still be a lottery talent in most other years.

[NYG]

Would the Spurs give up 8 and the '25 Hawks 1st to Houston to move up to 3?

Sheppard and Dillingham is a nice back-court duo at 3 and 4

.

.

[Chinook]

Would the Spurs give up 8 and the '25 Hawks 1st to Houston to move up to 3?

Sheppard and Dillingham is a nice back-court duo at 3 and 4

.

.

I don't think the Spurs want to give up the Hawks first or move up to 3. Doing both together doesn't seem to work. The Spurs are in a flex position when it comes to cap space. They can create a max slot with some effort or could be over the cap. The difference between 8 and 3 is $3 Million against the cap. Unless they want someone badly, I don't think the trade would have value to them. For the ATL pick, I don't think the Spurs should want to give up an unprotected pick from a shaky team for so little. You're talking about turning a good and a very good asset into one very good asset.