RealGM

Colbinii wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

Colbinii wrote:
You mean best or 2nd best?

Nope. I have no desire to have the first pick in this particular draft.

Right but offering #9 and a pick in 1 year that's 99% likely being in the 25-30 range isn't a serious offer.

I'll put it this way for Utah: They should be looking to add the highest possible potential player from this year's draft next to Keyonte George and Lauri Markkanen [I like Collin Sexton and Walker Kessler as well--warming up to Hendricks ].

I think #9 + Worst of MIN/CLE/UTA 1st is incredible value for Utah. I think Utah could even Top 3 or Top 5 protect the 1st or possibly send 2nd Worst.

You have to look at this draft. I’d bet my reputation (which is marginal at best) that the guy picked at 9 has as good a career as the number one pick in this draft. Top is really weak. #9 plus a future pick is fair imo.
I think a lot of team will be looking to trade down. It should be an interesting draft night trade wise.

babyjax13 wrote:

MKWB wrote:Pelicans could be in the mix with 2-3 firsts or Daniels and 1-2 firsts. Sarr could have their attention as a long-term switchable defensive Center with 3 pt. shooting potential.

I do think New Orleans makes sense as a team who can offer some volume assets and for whom there is a player of an archetype they could use.

You think they would trade Trey Murphy for the #1 pick?

NYG wrote:

JustBuzzin wrote:

NYG wrote:
What does Charlotte need?

Some defensive players who can also shoot.

Another 3&D wing would be fine.

Why not just take Sarr?

I mean he is a option, but we already have Mark Williams. Unless he has a serious back injury I doubt we take another big. I don't think they could play together neither has a jumpshot.

Honestly at this point Castle and Risacher are the only 2 I feel comfortable drafting. I rather we explore trades for established players.

JustBuzzin wrote:

NYG wrote:

JustBuzzin wrote:Some defensive players who can also shoot.

Another 3&D wing would be fine.

Why not just take Sarr?

I mean he is a option, but we already have Mark Williams. Unless he has a serious back injury I doubt we take another big. I don't think they could play together neither has a jumpshot.

Honestly at this point Castle and Risacher are the only 2 I feel comfortable drafting. I rather we explore trades for established players.

Would you do the trade in the Simons thread?


2 '27 1sts for Simons? If so, I'd draft Risacher and roll with Williams/Risacher/Miller/Simons/Ball as your core

JustBuzzin wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

MKWB wrote:Pelicans could be in the mix with 2-3 firsts or Daniels and 1-2 firsts. Sarr could have their attention as a long-term switchable defensive Center with 3 pt. shooting potential.

I do think New Orleans makes sense as a team who can offer some volume assets and for whom there is a player of an archetype they could use.

You think they would trade Trey Murphy for the #1 pick?

That’s a pretty interesting question. I wouldn’t trade Murphy for number one straight up, but I really like Murphy. That’s probably the range of player that is close to fair though.

NYG wrote:

JustBuzzin wrote:

NYG wrote:
Why not just take Sarr?

I mean he is a option, but we already have Mark Williams. Unless he has a serious back injury I doubt we take another big. I don't think they could play together neither has a jumpshot.

Honestly at this point Castle and Risacher are the only 2 I feel comfortable drafting. I rather we explore trades for established players.

Would you do the trade in the Simons thread?


2 '27 1sts for Simons? If so, I'd draft Risacher and roll with Williams/Risacher/Miller/Simons/Ball as your core

Not really a fan of Simons. I would want Sharpe if possible.

JustBuzzin wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:

MKWB wrote:Pelicans could be in the mix with 2-3 firsts or Daniels and 1-2 firsts. Sarr could have their attention as a long-term switchable defensive Center with 3 pt. shooting potential.

I do think New Orleans makes sense as a team who can offer some volume assets and for whom there is a player of an archetype they could use.

You think they would trade Trey Murphy for the #1 pick?

The value is close enough, but David Griffin's M.O. lately is "run it back." Valuing chemistry and internal improvement over roster trades that would better balance the fits. Which is why I always assume they won't trade any significant players.

The trade I had in mind was:
Dyson + Pels '24 pick (24th pick) + LAL '25 1st (top-2 prot.)
for
1st overall (Sarr).

Daniels isn't as flashy as Murphy's skillset, but 21 y/o and one of the best defenders in the league already (both in advanced metics and eye-test). Has secondary, high-IQ guard skills. He would be an awesome fit alongside Ball and Miller.

Unlikely to happen since it's not flashy enough to be an obvious flashy win trade for the fans, and Griffin probably would not want to give up so many assets. But it makes sense for sure.

Mark/ Richards
Bridges/ GrantW
Miller/ draft wing
Daniels/
Ball/ Micic/ Smith Jr.
---
+ extra '25 1st


MLE big/ Sarr/ Nance
Zion/ Murphy
Ingram/ Naji/ Ryan
Herb/ Hawkins
CJ/ Jose

I don’t want to detract from a fun thread, but the #1 pick is more than a player. It comes with a huge amount of publicity from the day of the lottery, through the draft, and into the season. This brings ticket-buying fans hope, and extends the time frame for the team and the GM’s job. Most teams that win the lottery need that more than trading for a good player.

But it’s still fun to ask the question, and see the offers, so carry on!

MKWB wrote:

JustBuzzin wrote:

babyjax13 wrote:I do think New Orleans makes sense as a team who can offer some volume assets and for whom there is a player of an archetype they could use.

You think they would trade Trey Murphy for the #1 pick?

The value is close enough, but David Griffin's M.O. lately is "run it back." Valuing chemistry and internal improvement over roster trades that would better balance the fits. Which is why I always assume they won't trade any significant players.

The trade I had in mind was:
Dyson + Pels '24 pick (24th pick) + LAL '25 1st (top-2 prot.)
for
1st overall (Sarr).

Daniels isn't as flashy as Murphy's skillset, but 21 y/o and one of the best defenders in the league already (both in advanced metics and eye-test). Has secondary, high-IQ guard skills. He would be an awesome fit alongside Ball and Miller.

Unlikely to happen since it's not flashy enough to be an obvious flashy win trade for the fans, and Griffin probably would not want to give up so many assets. But it makes sense for sure.

Mark/ Richards
Bridges/ GrantW
Miller/ draft wing
Daniels/
Ball/ Micic/ Smith Jr.
---
+ extra '25 1st


MLE big/ Sarr/ Nance
Zion/ Murphy
Ingram/ Naji/ Ryan
Herb/ Hawkins
CJ/ Jose

Herb Jones or Murphy are the only players I think would interest us in trading the #1 pick.

shrink wrote:I don’t want to detract from a fun thread, but the #1 pick is more than a player. It comes with a huge amount of publicity from the day of the lottery, through the draft, and into the season. This brings ticket-buying fans hope, and extends the time frame for the team and the GM’s job. Most teams that win the lottery need that more than trading for a good player.

But it’s still fun to ask the question, and see the offers, so carry on!

Great point. Another case of, even if the "value" is fair and makes sense, the "PR" side of selling that move to casual fans is often the more important thing.

Yes, and it’s a career-ender for the GM if he trades away the #1 pick and he becomes a superstar for another team.

JustBuzzin wrote:

NYG wrote:

JustBuzzin wrote:I mean he is a option, but we already have Mark Williams. Unless he has a serious back injury I doubt we take another big. I don't think they could play together neither has a jumpshot.

Honestly at this point Castle and Risacher are the only 2 I feel comfortable drafting. I rather we explore trades for established players.

Would you do the trade in the Simons thread?


2 '27 1sts for Simons? If so, I'd draft Risacher and roll with Williams/Risacher/Miller/Simons/Ball as your core

Not really a fan of Simons. I would want Sharpe if possible.

Sharpe is not on the market. Simons needs to go.

I like Risacher for the Cavs, but I'm not sure I'd give up any of our top 4 for him as the main piece as a deal, and nothing else the Cavs have deserves the #1 pick in return...

shrink wrote:I don’t want to detract from a fun thread, but the #1 pick is more than a player. It comes with a huge amount of publicity from the day of the lottery, through the draft, and into the season. This brings ticket-buying fans hope, and extends the time frame for the team and the GM’s job. Most teams that win the lottery need that more than trading for a good player.

But it’s still fun to ask the question, and see the offers, so carry on!

The Cavs tried pretty hard to trade No. 1 in the Anthony Bennett draft. According to contemporaneous local reporting, they almost succeeded as a couple teams were really high on Noel, but the teams that wanted him were too far back in the draft and couldn't trade up into the lottery to make it work.

It really depends on how you rate the players.

shrink wrote:I don’t want to detract from a fun thread, but the #1 pick is more than a player. It comes with a huge amount of publicity from the day of the lottery, through the draft, and into the season. This brings ticket-buying fans hope, and extends the time frame for the team and the GM’s job. Most teams that win the lottery need that more than trading for a good player.

But it’s still fun to ask the question, and see the offers, so carry on!

Was Fultz for Tatum the last time a 1st Overall was traded?

shrink wrote:Yes, and it’s a career-ender for the GM if he trades away the #1 pick and he becomes a superstar for another team.

Same if draft a dud there number 2-5 become studs.

NYG wrote:

shrink wrote:I don’t want to detract from a fun thread, but the #1 pick is more than a player. It comes with a huge amount of publicity from the day of the lottery, through the draft, and into the season. This brings ticket-buying fans hope, and extends the time frame for the team and the GM’s job. Most teams that win the lottery need that more than trading for a good player.

But it’s still fun to ask the question, and see the offers, so carry on!

Was Fultz for Tatum the last time a 1st Overall was traded?

I think so.

By the way, I love Risacher's fit with the Grizzlies, maybe they would want to change?

GGJackson +#6 for #1..

The Hornets take one from Castle/Topic/Sheppard in 6..

M.Williams/Richards
Bridges/G.Williams
Miller/GGJackson
Castle/Martin
Ball/Micic/Man

NYG wrote:

shrink wrote:I don’t want to detract from a fun thread, but the #1 pick is more than a player. It comes with a huge amount of publicity from the day of the lottery, through the draft, and into the season. This brings ticket-buying fans hope, and extends the time frame for the team and the GM’s job. Most teams that win the lottery need that more than trading for a good player.

But it’s still fun to ask the question, and see the offers, so carry on!

Was Fultz for Tatum the last time a 1st Overall was traded?

Yes, and the time before that was 2014 Wiggins, if you include it far after the draft. Personally though, LeBron wanted Love (correctly, since they won a title), and “appeasing a prime LeBron” has more value to a franchise than a #1 pick. Before that you’d have to go back to 1983, Chris Webber for (again) #3 plus stuff, and that was also influenced by a superstar (Shaq).

I think under the right circumstances, you might see a team trade the #1 to move back a couple spots. It has to be a flat top of the draft without an inspiring #1. It is rarer though to see the #1 traded for a win-now player, but can happen under extreme circumstances. 1980 BOS getting Parrish and McHale (#3) for #1 Joe Barry Carrol and #13 Rickey Brown, as an example.

theBigLip wrote:Pistons are in the same boat. If they win the lottery, I’d hope they trade it. Risasher or Sarr if they have to pick. But I’d swap it for a 2025 unprotected first plus extras. The top 5 drafted this year would likely have a problem getting into the top ten next year. So as long as you make a trade with a likely lottery team, you’re probably going to be fine.

So get the 2025 unprotected pick plus…
Washington: Avdija
Charlotte: another future pick
San Antonio: Vassell or Johnson

If I were a bottom five team I don’t think I’d trade a 2025 1st unprotected for the 2024 #1 overall pick straight up, let alone add pretty substantial value (based on your examples).