Rapsfan07 wrote:CazOnReal wrote:Unless you're getting a young star like Lauri Markkanen (which by all accounts it sounds like it's out of the question), trading our pick if it's Top 4 doesn't make sense unless you're doing something like Keldon Johnson and our pick control back for this year's pick.
And no, you don't trade the pick for LaMelo Ball just because we have free healthcare or whatever. Dude has the worst ankles in the league aside from his brother.
Brown + 19 or 31 to get someone the FO is high on/take a flier on someone like Hunter, Wiggins, etc. whose value is distressed and can be rehabilitated makes more sense if we do end up keeping our pick.
This is a horrible, horrible use of assets.
We'd be much better using these picks in hopes of at least getting a quality role player. Doing this not only makes us better in the short term but it also increases our asset base in the long term.
If a team is willing to adequately compensate us for taking on their long term money and we have no other plans for that space, then sure - we might do well to consider it.
But we shouldn't be looking at selling picks to buy vets at this stage of the rebuild. Picks should be paid to us for our space, whether we keep our pick or not.
To be clear, I am suggesting using Brown to move up and take on a bad contract that will eventually be flipped. For the Hawks, that would involve their pick (12th I think) or Bufkin and Hunter for Bruce Brown + 19th, as an example.
You could also try and do something similar with Boucher but it's much trickier to find a "bad contract" that he'd function as salary relief for.
