Official Trade Thread Part XLVI

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Read on Twitter

Would you trade Kuzma for #17 plus Gabe Vincent and Jarred Vanderbilt?

I probably would if we drafted Holland or Buzelis just to clear up roster room. But if we draft a wing or center, I'd probably hold out for a better Kuzma offer.

That's strange because I thought that pick was traded to the Pelicans in the Anthony Davis trade?

[nate33]

That's strange because I thought that pick was traded to the Pelicans in the Anthony Davis trade?

Without looking it up, I think the situation is that the Lakers traded a pick in every other season for Davis (because of the Stepien Rule). The 2023 and 2025 pick were sent out. 2024 happens to be one of the years where the pick wasn't traded.

Technically, they are unable to trade the 2024 pick while it is a "future pick" because the 2025 pick has already been traded away and you can't owe two consecutive picks to someone. But on draft day, the 2024 pick is no longer is a "future pick" and is therefore eligible to be traded.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

That's strange because I thought that pick was traded to the Pelicans in the Anthony Davis trade?

Without looking it up, I think the situation is that the Lakers traded a pick in every other season for Davis (because of the Stepien Rule). The 2023 and 2025 pick were sent out. 2024 happens to be one of the years where the pick wasn't traded.

Technically, they are unable to trade the 2024 pick while it is a "future pick" because the 2025 pick has already been traded away and you can't owe two consecutive picks to someone. But on draft day, the 2024 pick is no longer is a "future pick" and is therefore eligible to be traded.

Right, but every mock draft I look at shows the pick belonging to New Orleans.

[doclinkin]

Read on Twitter

Would you trade Kuzma for #17 plus Gabe Vincent and Jarred Vanderbilt?

I probably would if we drafted Holland or Buzelis just to clear up roster room. But if we draft a wing or center, I'd probably hold out for a better Kuzma offer.

Consensus mock says between 17 and 26 are guys like:
Da Silva. Edey. Ware. Furphy. Carrington. Kolek.

A solid bunch. I'd rather get Jared McCain but he looks to go a little ahead of that range.

But "all 3 tradable 1st round picks?". Sloppy reporting?

[9 and 20]

I don't think one pick is enough for Kuz, tbh. Jalen Hood Schifino, their recent #1, is even worse than Johnny Davis. They don't have a ton else if they can't trade another future pick. If they can, I'd absolutely do it.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Read on Twitter

Would you trade Kuzma for #17 plus Gabe Vincent and Jarred Vanderbilt?

I probably would if we drafted Holland or Buzelis just to clear up roster room. But if we draft a wing or center, I'd probably hold out for a better Kuzma offer.

Consensus mock says between 17 and 26 are guys like:
Da Silva. Edey. Ware. Furphy. Carrington. Kolek.

A solid bunch. I'd rather get Jared McCain but he looks to go a little ahead of that range.

But "all 3 tradable 1st round picks?". Sloppy reporting?

Ok, went to a bunch of mocks all showing Pelicans with that pick, Draft Room, hoopshype, tankathon, bleacher report...

Then I see The Ringer

They have New Orleans at 17, but a note explaining they can choose the Lakers 2024 1st rounder OR their 2025. I guess they've made their choice 2025.

17
New Orleans Pelicans
Kel'el Ware

Indiana, Sophomore
Kel'el Ware CENTER
HEIGHT 7'0"
WEIGHT 210
AGE 20.1

NEW ORLEANS PELICANS
The Pelicans must choose between receiving a Lakers first in 2024 or 2025. In this mock draft, the Pelicans keep the 2024 selection.

Consider how critical Dereck Lively has been to the Mavericks, even as a rookie. Could Ware have a similar influence in New Orleans? He is a vertical threat and has flashed an ability to shoot 3s. If the Pelicans opt to keep the pick, they’d have their choice of a number of different types of bigs to support their core players and another first to select an additional contributor.

[payitforward]

...Would you trade Kuzma for #17 plus Gabe Vincent and Jarred Vanderbilt?

I probably would if we drafted Holland or Buzelis just to clear up roster room. But if we draft a wing or center, I'd probably hold out for a better Kuzma offer.

Whenever you "hold out," you raise the possibility of something happening to lower a guy's value. That said, Vanderbilt is of no use to us & is guaranteed for the next 3 years. Gabe Vincent is also guaranteed for a couple of years & has no value.

I don't know whether we could get 2 R1 picks for Kuz; I doubt it. But, whatever we get, I imagine Dawkins wants draft capital not veterans.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

...Would you trade Kuzma for #17 plus Gabe Vincent and Jarred Vanderbilt?

I probably would if we drafted Holland or Buzelis just to clear up roster room. But if we draft a wing or center, I'd probably hold out for a better Kuzma offer.

Whenever you "hold out," you raise the possibility of something happening to lower a guy's value. That said, Vanderbilt is of no use to us & is guaranteed for the next 3 years. Gabe Vincent is also guaranteed for a couple of years & has no value.

I don't know whether we could get 2 R1 picks for Kuz; I doubt it. But, whatever we get, I imagine Dawkins wants draft capital not veterans.

I would think they could do better than 17 in a weak draft. I mean they got 26 for Gafford.

Lots of teams higher than 17 could use Kuz. And anything outside of the top 10 should include another future pick, like a lottery protected 2026.


I would try to do something with NY for their two 1st rounders...

Kuzma + our 2nd rounder (51) to NY for Bogdanovich & their 1st round picks (24 &25)

https://basketball.realgm.com/tradechecker/saved_trade/8776848



We could take Sarr at the top, and use picks 24, 25, 26 to draft for upside and supplement our roster with potential available players like Dadiet, Flowers, Duricic, Carrington, Sallis, Holmes, Dunn, among others.

[payitforward]

Who knows, of course...? But I'm consistently surprised by how high this Board rates Kuz.

If I had my choice between Kuzma & the #17 pick in this draft, I'd take the pick every time. & all the more for a team rebuilding from scratch the way we are.

Btw, Daniel Gafford is a better player than Kyle Kuzma.
You might want to look at the numbers he put up for Dallas in 29 games.

[nate33]

Who knows, of course...? But I'm consistently surprised by how high this Board rates Kuz.

If I had my choice between Kuzma & the #17 pick in this draft, I'd take the pick every time. & all the more for a team rebuilding from scratch the way we are.

Btw, Daniel Gafford is a better player than Kyle Kuzma.
You might want to look at the numbers he put up for Dallas in 29 games.

I rank him high because I know real NBA experts rank him high. I've seen enough posts from guys like Bobby Marks and John Hollinger to know that Kuzma has value. Teams desperately need big wings who can do lots of stuff. Kuzma may be trying to do too much with the Wizards, so his efficiency suffers, but he has the skillset to help a playoff team.

[DCZards]

Who knows, of course...? But I'm consistently surprised by how high this Board rates Kuz.

If I had my choice between Kuzma & the #17 pick in this draft, I'd take the pick every time. & all the more for a team rebuilding from scratch the way we are.

Btw, Daniel Gafford is a better player than Kyle Kuzma.
You might want to look at the numbers he put up for Dallas in 29 games.

I rank him high because I know real NBA experts rank him high. I've seen enough posts from guys like Bobby Marks and John Hollinger to know that Kuzma has value. Teams desperately need big wings who can do lots of stuff. Kuzma may be trying to do too much with the Wizards, so his efficiency suffers, but he has the skillset to help a playoff team.

Yeah…and that’s why numbers alone can’t tell you whose a better or more valued player.

[payitforward]

...I rank him [i.e. Kuz] high because I know real NBA experts rank him high. I've seen enough posts from guys like Bobby Marks and John Hollinger to know that Kuzma has value. Teams desperately need big wings who can do lots of stuff. Kuzma may be trying to do too much with the Wizards, so his efficiency suffers, but he has the skillset to help a playoff team.

Yeah…and that’s why numbers alone can’t tell you whose a better or more valued player.

nate -- I haven't seen those posts by Marks, Hollinger, et. al. If you can link to any, I'll be very interested.

Note as well that if you trade a guy for a R1 pick, that alone is indication that he has value. Teams don't give away first round picks.

Zards -- "numbers" are simply a record of what actually happens on the court. I do not see how a player who puts up bad numbers (in significant minutes of course) can be a good player anyway.

After all, the final score of a game is no more than a pair of numbers. If you win very few games, can you be a good team anyway?

& that pair of numbers, the final score, is no more than the simple product of all the other numbers represented in the box score.
& the numbers in the box score are no more than the simple sums of all the players' individual numbers.

& if the final scores actually represent wins & losses accurately -- i.e. if a team's record tells you how good or bad a team is -- then how can the individual players' numbers, which totally determine team numbers, not tell you how good those players are?

Is that what makes basketball interesting?
No, of course not! Basketball isn't arithmetic!

Is there room for interdependency of players.
Of course there is! & over time you do find out who makes other players somewhat better or worse.

All the same, we won 15 games this year.
Why? Because the numbers our players put up, as a team, in the games we played, were bad. Their numbers were significantly worse than the numbers put up by the players on opposing teams.

IOW, if you win 15 games your team lacks talent.
I.e. your team lacks talent, because your players lack talent.

Good players put up good numbers -- is there any way to doubt that?

Bad players put up bad numbers. Period.

Edit...
1 other thing: "good" & "bad" are comparative terms not absolutes.
Kuz is no doubt one of the very best basketball players in the global population of basketball players!

But, looked at among the @200 guys who play Forward in the NBA... no. In that select company, he's below average overall.

Is he a good teammate? -- sure looks like it! Is he a good person? -- it seems very much the case. Is he an interesting man? -- that's the impression I get for sure.

[DCZards]

^^^^ “Everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted.”
—Albert Einstein

But it doesn’t take a genius to know that.

[nate33]

...I rank him [i.e. Kuz] high because I know real NBA experts rank him high. I've seen enough posts from guys like Bobby Marks and John Hollinger to know that Kuzma has value. Teams desperately need big wings who can do lots of stuff. Kuzma may be trying to do too much with the Wizards, so his efficiency suffers, but he has the skillset to help a playoff team.

Yeah…and that’s why numbers alone can’t tell you whose a better or more valued player.

nate -- I haven't seen those posts by Marks, Hollinger, et. al. If you can link to any, I'll be very interested.

The first tweet links to a Bobby Marks podcast talking about how Kuzma is more valuable than Siakam. Siakam ended up netting Toronto Bruce Brown and 3 FRP's.

The second tweet is from Eric Pincus, an NBA journalist who is routinely on podcasts like the Ringer NBA show. His trade proposal amounts to Kuzma for Paul Reed, Jovic, the #16 pick in 2024, and a Philly FRP in 2026

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[penbeast0]

As the Trade Board fills with mediocre players and a draft pick deals for Deni Avdija, I'd like to know something.

Would this board swap Avdija for Cade Cunningham with Detroit? (I am not as high on Deni as some, but am probably considerably lower on Cade than most)

[NatP4]

As the Trade Board fills with mediocre players and a draft pick deals for Deni Avdija, I'd like to know something.

Would this board swap Avdija for Cade Cunningham with Detroit? (I am not as high on Deni as some, but am probably considerably lower on Cade than most)

Yes. That’s a really good trade idea.

[dckingsfan]

The full quote is: “Many of the things you can count, don't count. Many of the things you can't count really count.”

The meaning was intended to convey that in science you can calculate distance, speed, time, energy, etc. (although not always, see Schrodinger's cat). You can't count or measure love, freedom, happiness, joy and those are the things that really matter.

So, the question for a trade in context to the quote is measure love, freedom, happiness, joy, etc. in context to the trade

[dckingsfan]

Btw, Daniel Gafford is a better player than Kyle Kuzma. You might want to look at the numbers he put up for Dallas in 29 games.

Seems like he is figuring out the playoffs as well... started putrid and constantly improved. I think the Gafford/Lively duo will be good for quite some time to come.

Still, it could end up being a good trade for the Wiz as well, depending on who they draft with the pick.

[The Consiglieri]

Read on Twitter

Would you trade Kuzma for #17 plus Gabe Vincent and Jarred Vanderbilt?

I probably would if we drafted Holland or Buzelis just to clear up roster room. But if we draft a wing or center, I'd probably hold out for a better Kuzma offer.

That's strange because I thought that pick was traded to the Pelicans in the Anthony Davis trade?

And why is anyone giving them a 3rd star for a mid 1st in the worst draft in forever? Nobody sane would do that ever.

[nate33]

Portland picks #7 and #14
San Antonio picks #4 and #8

Those are the two trade-down targets.

I doubt San Antonio would trade #4 and #8 for #2 and #26, but Portland would probably consider #7 and #14 for #2 and #26. It might make sense if Dawkins actually likes a less heralded guy like Holland or Collier instead of guys like Topic and Risacher who seem to be near the top of most draft boards.

I'd be pretty happy to come away from this draft with Holland and McCain.