Speaker 1: What is up, Fellasikos. I am Dan Valley coming at
you with the one, the only, the indelible, the certified,
fantabulous co host of Hardwood Knocks, mister Grant Hughes surprise
surprise trade deadline content, But it is a bigger venture
this time. We are previewing or looking ahead, or providing
you with primers for every Eastern Conference team. The West
will go up at some point next week. We're trying
to strategize when we're gonna do these that they don't
become too dated or get ruined by a trade. We're
gonna go through all the fun stuff needs most likely
player to be traded. Some cap situations to keep in
mind first before we dive in, Grant, how the heck
are you doing?
Speaker 2: I'm upset at the collective Barning Agreement, which has made
the only way to do big trades to involve like
four or five teams, which increases the odds that a
good third of what we're about to talk about will
be stale and useless. So it was nice when you
could do one for ones, but we're not there anymore.
Speaker 1: It's also it's harder to go through like the pick
protections now right than it's ever been when you're looking
or the pick obligations, I should say, it feels.
Speaker 2: Like everything has gotten harder with in this CBA. Just
talking about teams in every way has become more complicent.
Maybe that won't be the sense I have like a
year from now or two years, but this is it's
all just wildly more complicated and restrictive, and you just
have to know more stuff than you used to used
to be like, uh, they're within twenty percent salary wise,
they're good. That trade works now, it's just like if
you get past that, there's ten more things to think about.
Speaker 1: Do you have any notes, comments, concerns, thoughts on the
All Star starters before we dive.
Speaker 2: In Mostly okay, I think what we probably I can't remember.
We were close to consensus on most of our starters
the like.
Speaker 1: So the East starters Donovan Mitchell, Jason Tatum, Giannis Karl,
Anthony Towns, and Jalen Brunton were my starters. I think
you had Garland over Mitchell. That's the only other candidate didn't.
Kate might have had a case to get in there
as a starter. He could be up there.
Speaker 2: I think I might have had mobilely over kat did I.
Speaker 1: He's another one who I think when it comes to
All NBA, I think is that's weird, Like his case
is probably stronger than cats there the West, I had
some I love Lebron, I'm here for the Lebron nostalgia,
but Anthony Davis or Victor Wemenyama over him. And I
also at this point, anyone who listened to the award show,
I would have preferred Anthony Davis or Victor Wemenyam over
Kevin Durant as well.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, I mean that was just that there
was no getting around that though, that you knew that
it was You're you're gonna get the legends, you know,
one last time.
Speaker 1: Which maybe, honestly I'm fine with. And at this point
it's which team are you starting for? Because there's eight teams.
I don't like what.
Speaker 2: Yeah that's true, so how many starters are there? It
feels like there's I mean all I think we both
would have a bigger issue if these were. I think
we care more about like who makes All NBA and
like the awards and that time like All Star is
just its own kind of thing. Like I still wouldn't
describe players will say like seven time All Stars, so
and so do you I don't, yeah, something, it's just
if you're trying to not repeat the name all the
time or use pronouns like say he he he, it's
like it's a seventh time All But I think increasingly
we're all aware that, like the All Star nods are
are good, Like you don't make eight or ten All
Star games if you suck. But like you know, the
All Star starter, for example, is like a designation that
might not actually indicate this guy is one of the
ten best players in the league.
Speaker 1: Well, there's also I found it fascinating Steph no wrote
about this at Sporting News, the discrepancy between la Melo
finishing first in fan voting and then seventh in media voting,
where there's just that different perception. And what's also interesting
is these votes came in at a time of like
Lamello was playing way better than he is at the moment,
so his case was arguably even stronger. If you did
the votes at this moment, I bet you there'd be
an even larger gap between the media and the fans.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean that one. I did hear some good
arguments about we've gone I feel like we've ping ponged
on this several times. Now I'm kind of like, well,
maybe he is underrated, which prior to this, I think
I would have said he's not being treated fairly or
he's over it. It's just like his evaluating him is
so hard.
Speaker 1: I think it's hard. I just feel like a lot
of people gravitate towards the wrong focus on the defense
of the availability. Don't he can't win. What team right
in Charlotte has been built to win since LaMelo has
been there.
Speaker 2: I think that's a fair. That's a fair.
Speaker 1: He's following the domas a bonus track. Is that so
many people thought he was overrated. I think domas a
bonus is underrated now.
Speaker 2: It always swings back at some point because too many
people gom onto the idea.
Speaker 1: All right, let's talk about the NBA trade deadline with
regard to every single Eastern Conference team, the Atlanta Hawks.
Things to know about the Hawks, though they are one
point three million below the luxury tacks, they are not
going to pay it. Do not try and convince us
otherwise that they are going to pay it. So this
is not a team that will be taking on money
in any trades. Then you have some picks, of course
that they could throw around, not their own, but they
have the Lakers and Kings pay this year as well
as the Pelicans or Milwaukee pick in twenty twenty seven.
Start here, What are you anticipate that, assuming they do something,
they could just stand still. Do you think they're more
likely to try and add or subtract.
Speaker 2: Well, just the lack of control of the twenty five,
twenty six, twenty seven picks which we have upon the screen,
I think I don't think this can be a seller.
We've talked about this a little bit, where like they
do have players that you definitely would sell under other circumstances.
I think maybe Clint Capella and Larry Nance, who's injured
still could fit into that category. But this is just
not a team. First of all, we both think the
Hawks are pretty good and beyond that, like interesting and
potentially competitive, like beyond a play in level, So I
would I don't think anything big is gonna happen here,
But I just think it makes a little more sense
to be you know, like thoughtful shoppers instead of as well,
let's just dump off Bogdanov and compel it like because
what's the what's the upside there? Right? Do you agree?
I think it's selling just normally would make sense. But
the pick thing is like, well, the decision's kind of
made for them.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I would I think they're probably more likely,
probably not in a big way, even though I've said
this before. If I was running the Hawks right now,
there's a chance I'd do something stupid. But it feels
like their biggest need like to get like another creator
or just like a reserve floor general. The Kobe Buffett injury,
I don't know that he was the answer, but that
injury is a bummer bug. Donovich has been injured, not
played particularly well when he has been on the court,
and then it's just you're asking a little too much
of Jalen Johnson or Dyson Daniels to create often from
these dead stops, even though Jalen Johnson's gotten way better there.
So is that, like, do you have identify any other
things that they should maybe be targeting?
Speaker 2: Well, I mean presumably, Well, I don't know. Let's talk
about this because this will be an issue that comes
up for not just the Hawks, but like, there you
have him about one point three million below the tax line,
like is that gonna like is are they gonna do
anything that They're not gonna do anything that puts them
over the tax, right, you can always get out of
the tax later, but like they're not they're not going
to be a team that, to use your term, they're
not gonna do something stupid because they're pretty good. Like
I think they'll be very The finances will be kind
of front of mine. I think as they're because they're
tight enough that it's like it's just not worth getting
into the tax. You want to get that payout from
the league if you can.
Speaker 1: What's also awkward, though, is that unless you think that
they should be I mean because a Kungu was inserted
into the starting lineup, so I guess they now have decided, Okay,
like we're sure, and maybe they always were sure, but
that's your big of the future. It's like, I don't, like,
do you want another type like a wing that's a
little bit more two way than a Resa Che or
a Dice and Daniels is right now, I think it's
a backup play or another playmaker. And if you're not
doing anything major, like what like you're not getting someone
like that for like pennies on the dollar for the
most part, So that makes it almost a little bit
more difficult to traverse the trade deadline for them.
Speaker 2: I think too. Like again, normally you would say, well,
they could turn that. What's Kapella make twenty twenty two,
you let's turn that. Let's let's think about flipping him
into someone that might make that amount, you know, and
has two or three years left on his deal. Even
that is like, well, before you know it, Daniels is
going to be extension eligible, Like there are you know,
there are these other costs that are gonna come up,
and the Hawks always try to avoid the tax. So
it's like, I think it's this will be true for
a lot of other teams too, Like I think, just
not doing anything and holding on to Capella, especially in
this situation like that would have seemed insane in years past,
because oh, we lose the salary slot or whatever that
that seems fairly likely to me. I I well, because
because like, who's clamoring for Capella at that number for
a half season rental?
Speaker 1: And even if you is, because doesn't it get tough too.
Let's just let's say they did something like trading Clin
Cappella for Lonzo Ball or Malcolm Brogden, who would fill
one need, But then you've created another because Larry Nance Junior.
I think if you can tell me Larynx Junior is healthy,
I'd be fine rolling forward with him at a come
just like that those fives. But you can't say that,
and so you would then create another need. And maybe
it's easier to pick a big up on the cheap.
So I'm not entirely against them trading clin Capella, but
I'm with you in the sense there's nothing here that's
urgent to do. I think the move I have their
most likely player to be traded as Larry Nance Junior,
just an expiring contract, and then that's the way. Okay,
you're not compromising your center rotation at the moment. If
it's a matter of attaching seconds or even just getting
somebody who maybe gives you a little bit more ball handling,
can you do address that need by going down that path?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I agree, I think it's nan'ce just for the
same reason, like, if you're gonna let one of them
go or not get anything back for him, it should
just be him. He's got the hand fracture. I think
I forget if it's a rister hand and like Capella
is gonna help still like he's not starting anymore, but
Capel is still like I don't know, he's a very
high end backup center. And if you're the Hawks and
you're still trying to win as much as you can
this year, like he just matters more even if you
could get more for him than you could Nance. Nance
has got to be the guy that's most likely to go.
Speaker 1: But then it also is tough. It's like what are
you getting. You're not unless you're attaching something to Nance,
you're not getting value. So maybe you could take on
salary for next year, kind of like you mentioned and
get some seconds. Or maybe someone like a Cleveland, maybe
they wanted to roll the dice on Larry Nance and
they think he's healthy and they'll send you something. Yeah,
it's a weird spot to be. But because the pick
obligations and because they're kind of frisky, they're a team
that I think can look at themselves as hey, we're
trying to make incremental improvements. Maybe not anything big time,
though I agree you want to take us through this
next team Grant.
Speaker 2: Yeah, not a lot happening or likely to happen here.
For the Boston Celtics, we well, actually they should blow
the whole thing up because they're like five hundred since
basically over the last month, they just like.
Speaker 1: I can't bring myself to be concerned about them.
Speaker 2: No, no, I'm making of course, like this is the
most obvious, Like we're just like kind of tired and
know how good we are, so I don't we don't
care about late December to late January. That's all this is, right.
I guess you could hand ring and probably Celtics fans
that watch every second of every game could point to
a half dozen things that like could be trouble spots
if you wanted to be alarmist about it.
Speaker 1: I'm not.
Speaker 2: It's going to take a lot more than a five
hundred month for me to get there. I don't know
how you feel, but I mean I do know how
you feel. We kind of agree on it. So just
not likely to be active for the following reasons. Essentially,
the Celtics are over seven million dollars above the second apron.
They essentially like they're they're as hamstrung by all of
the restrictions as just about any team here, which is
to say that you got you can't send out more
than you take back, you can't aggregate all this other stuff.
That's why Jaden Springer is probably this person that if
you're talking about the Celtics trade deadline, you spend ninety
five percent of your words on, because that's just someone
that you might be able to send out into somebody's
cap space or whatever and not take back money and
save like four x his salary in salary and tax payments.
Like beyond that, is there something you see Boston doing
or something that Boston should be trying to do with
their limited resources.
Speaker 1: So I would let's note with this, so being in
the second apron, like finishing the season there, you are
now freezing your draft pick seven years into the future.
It can no longer be traded. And then if you
finish above the second apron and more than one of
the next four seasons afterward, that pick drops to number
thirty overall.
Speaker 2: Now it remains frozen too, right, Like that doesn't go away.
Speaker 1: Right, And I think that's the bigger thing here is
that you have now if you finished in the second apron,
you have functionally decided that this draft pick is not
going to be on the table for basically like close
to a half decade, and I'm just wondering. I don't
see any way to do it, but they do have
they have some interesting seconds to throw around. Do you
view any one aside from Jayden Springer? And I think
you're probably getting into the Peyton Pritcher Al Horford of
it to where where they would decide, well, let's just
get out of the second apron. I can't bring myself
to think that way, but it's just in the back
of my mind because the number is small enough. If
they are seven point six million in the second apron,
where in theory now you have to fill roster spots
after all this, But seven point six million, that's doable
even mid season if you really wanted to. But I
ultimately think that if they're gonna do anything, maybe it's
just to cut the tax bill. Or can you turn
Jaden Springer into someone that you think, like, what would
you have as their biggest need? I have reserve wing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's always been the who's who can you play
behind Tatum and Brown on the wing?
Speaker 1: Like that, like him for Tory Craig, like like it's
something like that. I don't even know if that does
it like that still lowers your tax bill a little bit,
to be fair.
Speaker 2: I think I think it is interesting that like al
Horford would get you there probably if you get him
off the books for no money coming back and you
sign a minimum guy or or figure out how to
like bounce your two ways around to where your roster
charges are minimal. Like I don't know, I I the
restrictions are so brutal, like going down the road that
like you might you might think about that. I think
ultimately the Celtics like are actually justified and operating as
if they were the Suns. You know, we've talked a
lot about the Suns and just how recklessly they've they've done,
Like the Suns seem to think they're as close to
a championship as the Boston is. Uh, but so like
that's all to say if Boston did want to just say, like,
we don't care about that pick getting frozen, We're as
good as a team can be right now, and we'll
just eat it. Like that's justifiable. That's it's not for
almost any other team, but them willingly staying above the
second apron for as long as they need to to
keep this window open is like, yeah, you should probably
do that.
Speaker 1: So would you consider So you have game Springer, that's
four million, can't take back any more than that. If
you're setting out the four million they have the two
seconds I kind of have highlighted they own the most
favorable from Detroit, Dallas, Golden State, or Washington. So that's
number thirty one, yes, that's yeah, they oh number thirty
one this year and then in twenty twenty six the
most favorable for Minnesota, New Orleans, New York, or Portland.
Like could you get or would you even be willing
to say, hey, here's Jaden Springer our twenty twenty five
first round pick, and like if that could get you
santi al Dama, oh, would you consider it? Like I
don't know if Memphis would, But at the same time,
like Jay Huff is cheap there, they have Brandon Clark,
they have Jaron Jackson, Junior Zach Edy or I don't
think the Kings would do this, but maybe a twenty
twenty five first one or both of these seconds for
Keon ellis Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean that you've really you've opened my eyes, like
there are actually things they could do here. I would
counter and like Aldama. I think Aldama's my favorite. Well,
I really like Elis too.
Speaker 1: Ellis might feel more of an immediate need. But when
you're looking at the trajectory of al Horford the injury
stuff to christophs Porzingis, you could argue that, like Sandi,
al Dama might feel better long term need in addition
to right an immediate need. At the same time, he's
gonna be like, are you gonna pay? If you're not
going to pay him, there's no point in giving up stuff.
Speaker 2: Exactly. He's about to get paid, And I think al
Dama's gonna get paid or whatever that counts for these days.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm gonna say he probably doesn't get he'll get
less than the mid level. I'm just gonna default to
that for like almost everybody at.
Speaker 2: This point, I would. The counter though, is like, let's
say that twenty five second is number thirty one. If
you're Boston and you are as expensive and inflexible as
you are, don't you kind of want like a really
good second like the basically the best second round pick
you can have and cost control that because the rules
for signing guys to contracts in the second round are
like kind of whatever the fuck you want to do.
It's not like there's there's there's slotted scales like in
the first round.
Speaker 1: So they're probably gonna end up with number twenty eight.
And so what you're saying is you'd rather trade number
twenty eight and then number thirty one.
Speaker 2: Well, I just think.
Speaker 1: You're not You're not.
Speaker 2: I'm just saying the value of an early second round
or to Boston might be like more significant than it
would be for almost any other team because of all
the restrictions that they're facing.
Speaker 1: But that's what I'm saying. It's just like, wouldn't couldn't
you envision us a scenario where the want at number
twenty eight is available at number thirty one and you're
gonna get them incrementally cheaper, So why not trade number
twenty eight? Because then it's the team says we got
a first round pick the other team and you're like,
we got the same guy we were always gonna get exactly.
Speaker 2: And if you're Boston, you can even like I don't know,
you can make a promise to somebody like, hey, don't
go work out for whoever is. You know, It's like
I think if you if you told me that that
pick is the key to getting Elis or Aldama or whatever,
then I'm trading that pick. But if that stuff's not
on the table, I value that.
Speaker 1: If I'm Boston, my King's logic. By the way Ellis
is playing more, it's just Devin Carter's there. If they
were looking to pick up an additional first round pick,
if I'm Boston, I might give up that first And
because he has another year of cost controlled left right
Keon Ellis, I would send out my first in both
these seconds for him. I would even think twice about it.
If he's under if he's cheap for another year, which
I believe he is, I'll double check it. I would
absolutely send out just all three of those things. You
know what, that's that's me. And does he has a
team option so we would still be cheap, but that's me.
How much is he playing in Boston?
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, less than he is now, that's for sure.
Speaker 1: I would give up my first round pick for him, though.
Speaker 2: That's I would especially late.
Speaker 1: Most likely player to be traded those jads, but would
even be the second.
Speaker 2: I mean the second name is like Al Horford, and
there's no way they're trading Al Horford.
Speaker 1: Well, what if you get back to the Alabama.
Speaker 2: Well then you have to pay him. It's it's Springer
and it's not close.
Speaker 1: The Brooklyn Nets they are notably six hundred and seventy
thousand dollars beneath the luxury tax, and so they're not
taking on money as part of any deal either. They're
gonna be looking at shed salary if anything. They have
a bunch of picks, but like like all those Knicks
picks they have, I just there's not like so they
they're sending. They're not trading a first round pick. That's
what I'm basically getting at. So they're just will they
trade Cam Johnson? Will they trade Cam Thomas? Do they
look at trading Dayron Sharper, Nicholas Claxton, what is how
do you approach the trade deadline as the Nets grant
knowing that, like you've done, the two most likely players
to be traded have already been traded.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So I've kind of had a change of heart
about them recently because I kind of put them in
the bucket of like, if it's not nailed down, trade it.
That extends to Cam Johnson, get whatever you can. You're rebuilding.
Who cares the goals to be bad because you got
your picks back on and on, and now I kind
of am thinking, like, obviously, if you can get to first,
then they're real. First. For Cam Johnson, you absolutely trade
him because, like, I don't think his value is going
to get any higher. I think this particular market where
based on what he makes and like just who else
is available comparatively. He just looks very good, plug and
play all that stuff. If you get to first, do it.
But I don't think it's the worst thing in the
world if you can, if you hang on to him
through this deadline. And that's just because he is a
player type that I'm going to argue against myself, like
that this player type should retain value. It's not like
it's an aging star that well, one more year goes
by and he can't be the leader of our offense.
Like that's just not what Cam Johnson is. And I think,
because you also got control of the twenty six pick back,
your timeline is not It's not like this is the
year that the tanking has to begin an end. It's
like you could just do this next year and maybe
the market is more favorable than it is now. So
I think we're gonna talk about who's the most likely
player to be traded. I would have said Cam Johnson
a week ago, but just think just in terms of
like what's available, where the market seems to be going.
I don't think it's a huge mistake if they hold
on to him. But what do you think about that?
Is it? Do you have to move him now because
he is playing like better than he has and he's
not young?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I know, so I would say that my most
likely player to be trade is Dayron Sharp because he's
not under contract for next year, he's had some injury issues.
There are teams that could use secondary bigs, and he
will give you some mobile heft. And I'm with you.
I just don't think there's an urgency to move Cam Johnson.
I'm and look, if one of the first round picks,
like it's just like in the that you know it's
going to be bottom five in this year's draft, what's
the do you still have that urgency. I even prefer
a pick that's not in twenty twenty five, And then
i'd rather if you're not going to send another pick
on top of that, I want a player, which is
why I think that some people have circled the Kings
where it's what would they give you Devin Carter and
a pick with Kevin Herder, And I don't think they would.
He's in that's that's where Cam Johnson's also in bizarre
territory because we've gone through this with the Warriors. Is
I think he'd be an excellent fit there, But like,
how much of your stuff are you actually willing to
if you're trying to straddle a middle ground? How far
is too far? I have a question for you, though,
even though I don't think there's an urgency to move him.
Which team says no to this? The Nets get Jock Landale,
Jay Sean Tate and their twenty twenty seven first round
pick back. Houston gets Cam Johnson, who says, no, there's
a swap right now that they owed, like you said,
the right to swap it.
Speaker 2: Man, I don't think who So that's the way that
one first gets it done if it's as if it's
your own right like that. I if I'm Brooklyn, I
don't know. I think I might do that, So I
guess Houston, But I think that's kind of like they
both should They both might say yes their do you
what do you think do you think Houston's the one
that says no, I'm.
Speaker 1: Just if you're Houston. I understand the optics of this,
Like you have the right to swap with the Nets,
but like the Nets two years from now, even if
you don't think they're gonna be as good as you,
they're not, Like, are they gonna be one of the
what are the odds? It's more likely that the pick
the Sun sent to the Jazz in twenty thirty one
is gonna convey in the top ten to me than
the Nets pick in twenty twenty seven to Houston.
Speaker 2: It is hard to Yeah, it's hard to be sure.
I mean a lot depends on that might be.
Speaker 1: My lack of It's just two thousand and thirty one
is so far away because I think you can make
the argument that the most valuable Suns pick out there
is like having the right to have twenty twenty eight
or twenty twenty nine, Like those feel like the ideal
years for Brooklyn. You know they're gonna be terrible the
next two years, and we've this year was proof because
they were too good and they just a blittered. They
they stopped being too good. They made trades that were early.
I think I honestly think Houston's the team that winds
up saying no, I'm not sure that they should though,
because Cam Johnson comes in doesn't compromise your long term
payroll structure. But if you're worried about, well, where are
you finding him minutes? Because Jay Schontate is playing now,
but you're basically set like where like who's minutes are
being chopped down? Like Cam Whitmore has been playing a
little bit extra, Reed Shepherd's already not playing, So how
are you figuring out the rotational balance?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean there's iterations of the Rockets, you know
a year from now that involved like well Fred van
Vliet's gone and Aman Thompson's the point guard and so
then you really need another shooter out there. It can't
just be Jabari Smith. So like then Cam Johnson makes sense.
But yeah, you're right, like as it is, like he
should play, he should be in the rotation and or
or start for wherever he ends up. But the Rockets
are kind of they already have too many guys went healthy.
Like I guess if you think man Jabbari is like
we're worried about how he's gonna look when he comes
back and we want to win as much as we
can this year then, But that kind of short term
thinking just doesn't really square with I think where Houston
is now.
Speaker 1: I'm contradicting my assumption though, But couldn't you look at
it as Cam Johnson in his role with the Rockets
or that like swapping with the Nets? What has more value?
Like like, couldn't you in theory like Cam Johnson's trade
value even if he goes to Houston and plays like
it's not gonna.
Speaker 2: Nuke, you wouldn't think, Yeah, no, I don't. I don't.
I don't think it would. I guess like a lot
of it honestly would depend on So let's just okay, well,
what's what is the what's the most likely way that
that giving that giving back that swap if you're Houston
like really comes back to bite you, and it's the
Nets just like continue to be one of the five
worst teams, right, and like looking at the free agent landscape,
like who's the next guy that's gonna shake loose that
they might use that cap space on to get them
back to like, well, now this pick is thirteenth or whatever,
Like I don't know. I don't know who that guy is.
Like we're all we do is talk about how there
are no free agents anymore. Everybody resigns. I so, yeah,
I don't I think to answer your question initially, I
do think Houston is the one that says no. I
don't know if that's the right decision. I just think Brooklyn,
if it can get that pickback, should Yes, you should
do that. That's that csier side of.
Speaker 1: It, is it. It was my own idea. I kind
of like it for both sides because too, That's why
I hesitated even with Houston. It's I'm not advocating because
both of these players are bet way better defensively, but
like Cam Johnson's number being locked in for the next
two years, if Jabari Smith Junior or Atari Easton like
end up pricing themselves out and you don't want to
necessarily get rid of a Dylan Brooks or something, it
just gives you more flexibility there. So I would do
it if I'm both sides. But it was my own idea,
so that probably rings hollow. Let's know in the comments
which team says no to that. As we move on
to everybody's favorite team, the Charlotte Hornets. Yeah, Grant, let's
talk about this. I know that they're your team. But
can LaMelo Ball win? Kidding?
Speaker 2: Is he a winning player?
Speaker 1: Uh?
Speaker 2: Nobody knows. We'll never know. We're not gonna Uh, Charlotte's
too bad. So they are seven point two million below
the Tacks. Their twenty five first rounders going to the
Spurs with lottery protection turns into twenty six and twenty
seven seconds. We've talked about that. They're not in danger
of getting into tax territory for next season either. They
could even be a team that has cap space to spend,
which again the I don't know who that's getting spent on,
But there are so few teams that can say that
that it means something, right, Like it's still just like, oh,
Brooklyn and San Antonio can get there, and then that's it. Like,
you know, there's a couple other teams that can get
there too. But to have the ability to be a
cap space team, I think maybe counts for both more
and less than it used to, just because there are
so few teams that can do that and cap space
doesn't seem to mean much. So that's a I guess
that's like a eye of the beholder situation. This is
one of the worst teams in the league. Brandon Miller's
out for the season now after surgery on that wrist injury.
I'm not sure how helpful of the player he was,
but like, this isn't this isn't a bye team, this
is this is still I think, And tell me where
whether you agree or disagree with the note here on
the screen, Like they should just be taking bad money
on right, Like it seems like that would be the
type of thing this new ownership and management would do.
Is like, let's take the long view we can If
we suck next year, fine, We're trying to make decisions
that make us sustainably good, you know, starting in a
couple of years. That feels like the more likely scenario
for them, as opposed to we need another young player
to add to our core. Like that doesn't that That's
not the way things seem to be shaping up to me.
Speaker 1: No, I think if the Nick Richards trade is probably
a good analog, just even if they don't take back
long term money, Like I have Cody Martin as the
most likely player to be traded, surprise, surprise. But like
if a team like he's making eight million dollars as
contracts non guaranteed for next year. You can move him.
I think the biggest thing he does is going to
be on defense. Like his just positional versatility there and
ability to be effective in those different situations. Try and
get seconds for guys that don't factor into the long
term plan without maybe taking back then really bad money.
Those seem like the one you outlaid and then that
those seem like the two ways they'll go. And I
think that's the right way right now because I get
wanting to remain maybe a little bit lean with your
payroll moving forward. But you just have no idea how
close to a breakthrough you are. Because I like, there's
real hope for Brandon Miller. I don't know how I
feel about his all NBA upside anymore, but as like
a number two, number three guy, like there's potential there
and you know you have LaMelo, that's it. Like the
t John Salon, Josh Green, even Mark Williams with durability issues,
you just you don't have enough nailed down that you
know needs to be here long term. You need more
information and I don't like their future is one of
the hardest to map out, because I could tell you
very easily what I think they should do with the
trade deadline. But looking at them through a long term lens,
I really think that this year's draft pick is going
to be a defining moment for them.
Speaker 2: Yeah right, I agree, And it's interesting to note again
this would mean something different I think in other years.
But I want to make sure I get this right
just looking at so they get they have. Joshakogen now
came over in the Richard trade. His salary is non
guaranteed for next year. That's about seven almost eight million.
That's also the case for Martin eight point seven million
non guaranteed, and vasili Micic is eight point one million,
and it's a team option. So that's I mean, that's
not a real player that you know of expiring salary
that you could send somebody that just wants clean books
that you could take back. I don't know who that is.
But normally we'd be talking about Charlotte as an obvious
like get out of jail free card for some other
team that has bad money. Like maybe that still happens.
I don't think, like, for example, I'm just trying to
think of names with big money and would like to
get off, Like Jeremy Grant is not coming to Charlotte,
Is that what you're gonna say?
Speaker 1: Because they're poorly trouble just fans that said they wouldn't
take both Lakers picks for Jeremy Grant, which was bonkers
in the moment, And I'm like, would you even get
And Portland is not super flexed, They're not going to be,
and even if they are, they'll figure out a way
to duck the tax. But like if you could, if
it was just you'd have to send back. Actually, I
think those three they don't. Charlotte doesn't want to be
a tax team, so it's like it would have to
be a four for one to get super complicated. And
that's also the other thing here, but so he makes
too much, but like who would be another player where
it's like do you just see.
Speaker 2: Like, yeah, that's so sick that he was the exact
same We both came up with Jeremy Grant, who doesn't
fit by the way, exactly salary wise, we need, like.
Speaker 1: You said, Washington and his deals declining, they're not going
to want to get out of Kuzma that badly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and they're not and if you're I'm trying to think, like, well,
obviously Washington should not be giving up picks, but like,
if you're Charlotte, are you saying to take on Kuzma,
we need a pick from you?
Speaker 1: I would, I would take the I mean with the
way that Miles Bridges has played this year, but like
now you're cannibalized.
Speaker 2: Having Kuzma on the hornets, like what's.
Speaker 1: On there too? Yeah, so that's just you're not gonna
do that. It would be like a Jeremy If Jeremy
Grant made less, though, that wouldn't be a terror because
he's not going to ruin your tank. If you could
just send those three out to get him and stay
out of the tax like Portland didn't want picks back,
and maybe you're you're using other teams to figure out
the roster spot math. That's not I don't think that's
a terrible Like either he reboots his value and you
can put him for something else later, either you get
better and he helps you, or ends up being oh,
we used up our cap space on Jeremy Grant and
we weren't gonna sign anybody who was fantastic anyway.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what you really don't want is to take on
grant and this is as good as he's gonna be,
which is under forty percent from the field, like the
thing that it's not great right now, and then you're
in the position of like this money's here until we
give up a pick to move it, Like that's the
worst case for them, and they cannot. If there's like
a ten percent chance that that's how it goes, you
probably can't do that because that's like so anithetical to everything.
So it's it's tough. Like again, normally, having seven fifteen, sixteen,
twenty five million in expiring salary is like, let's go,
like what are we gonna do with this? And I
don't feel like that's the.
Speaker 1: Case at this But did he give you something to
take back? Terry? Terry?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's so to like nobody, it's everything is so
weird this year. I just I feel like the rules
are different, Like things that meant one thing last year
at this time or two years ago certainly just don't
mean the same thing anymore.
Speaker 1: So two questions, what do you think if they were
just chasing a flyer or like a second or third
draft guy, what do you think is their biggest need.
Speaker 2: Well, it's I mean, they're kind of a blank slate.
I guess you're not good enough to best player available.
I would say, like, you can always just go to
wings that can defend as long. If LaMelo is your
cornerstone and you don't really want him at a point
of attack on defense or guarding another good wing, you
just need a guy that's gonna do that at three,
big shock, three and D. You know, let's get a
three and D wing out there to support our our
lead ball handler. That's about That's what I would think.
Speaker 1: What about I could see, I just I know Mark
Williams can be good, but just the minutes you've seen
from Bridges and Salon this year, they could use an upgrade,
unless you think Diabate is the answer, put like at
the four or five spot for sure. Like they would
be a team like if the Knicks. And I don't
think we'll get to the Knicks, but if they were
gonna trade you Mitchell Robinson for Cody Martin essentially, like
I would do it, like you're including something else there
to make the math work, I would just yeah, why not, Like,
let's see Mark Williams might be better and maybe Mark
Williams will be healthier right forward, but that's something they
could do. So I also thought about, they don't necessarily
need this, but like you have the expiring contracts, technically,
would you consider like bringing Lonzo Ball in?
Speaker 2: One hundred percent every team should consider bringing Lonzo Ball in.
But yeah, sure, that's a I mean, I like the
story of that, and I'm weirdly like, wouldn't you say
that there.
Speaker 1: Unless you think it's Trey Mann who's been banged up
ever since his hot start. They don't necessarily have like
a another guard next to LaMelo of the IVY, Brandon
Miller is a wing, so if you want to say
he's that.
Speaker 2: But what's so bizarre is how good of a fit
Lonzo is next to LaMelo, because they're so different. I mean,
and then like some like every would you say that whatever,
however unfounded it is or wealth, it's just perspective. LaMelo
is not a winner, like no one would say Lonzo
is like the opposite of that, like, oh he makes
everybody better. He does all the little things like that
guy's defends makes open threes. Now again, Lonzo has the
injury stuff obviously, but like, yeah, he would fit great.
He would be an awesome fit there.
Speaker 1: And also because the Bulls, and we're about to talk
about them, but just very quickly, they're so close to
the tax. Like if you're Charlotte and you do vasa
mesic and one of your other like non guarantees, I
would probably, Ah, would you lean towards if you're Charlotte
and it had to be Cody Martin or Josha Kogi?
A Kogi saves the Bulls more money under the tax,
but like who would you? It'd be message plus one
of those guys for Lonzo. I'm just one hundred percent
doing that. Yeah, And I would send out I mean
you'd have to look at their second round pick commitment.
It's not sending out like a great second to do
it because they could they could just sign Lonzo Ball
this summer if they really wanted to. But if the
Bulls are just looking to increase their breathing room maybe
for other deals. If I'm Charlotte, I'm trying to see
like if they have any just throwaway second, like a
protected second, So it would just be something to consider.
And also the story would be really Oh, they have
a shit ton of seconds coming in, Like I would
give them. So that two of those guys plus Denver's
twenty twenty six second, why not do it? The Calves.
They're one point seven million into the tax, and they
have conveyed that they will pay the tax. I just
question whether they will because they're already seven million into
the tax next season. That's with just ten deals in
roster charges. And so that's not including Karas Lovert or
Todd Jerome, who's been pretty important this year. They have
the ability to trade their twenty and thirty one first
rounder and a twenty three swap if they wanted to
do something kind of splashy. Do you think to move here? Oh?
Sorry to go back to Charlotte. Who do you think
is their most likely player to be traded?
Speaker 2: I think probably Martin. You can make the case for
a Kogie. I'm just of those two, I think they're
more likely than Mitch to be like, oh, I could
see a team. Yeah, those two could help a team,
like you know, just as wings Mitich is like, you
need a third point guard? I don't know with.
Speaker 1: So with Cleveland, let's look at it this way. Do
you think that their most likely move is do we
just trade away Tristan Thompson, and that ducks the tax
for us and we roll forward.
Speaker 2: I mean, if it's not him, yes, if it's not Thompson,
what's the other path to do in that? Like, I
feel like you kind of need everybody else need more
than you need Thompson. Granted that Mobley's injury right now
means you probably want that other big Thompson's actually like
playing occasionally now. But who else are you even considering
as a way to get a duck that one point
cut that one point seven million off? I don't I
don't really see an obvious.
Speaker 1: Can I think what you could? I don't like. I
don't think they would. They're definitely not, excuse me, dumping
Ty Jerome. Would they consider that with Sam Merrill? Like
he's played important minutes for them, But you do have
Max Strews. The move for them would be And these
are different levels of significance, But you take Caris Lavert
or Isaacacorro or George Niang and you just turn them
into a cheaper player as part of the larger deal.
I think at this point it feels like Kris LeVert
may actually be the most important of those three, but
also George Niang, Like, do you want Dean Wade playing
up like all the time because you have Mobile and
Allen like your center is set? But do you want
to if you trade away George Yang and don't get
back a four or a combo big? Like how much
are you trusting like a Dean Wade to play up
a Max s Truce to play up? But it almost
if you're looking to actually make like you're not if
you're not gonna give up Thompson, I'm wondering if the
name is do you trade George Niang attached to something
and you're getting a cheaper place layer back?
Speaker 2: I mean, I'm gonna know this isn't good pod and
I'm gonna short circuit the exercise. But like, no, you
just don't. You don't take anybody off of this roster
that has just kicked ass all season when you have
the option to just make it be Tristan Thompson to
duck the tax I think, like, for sure, there are
You're right, there are ways that I wasn't really thinking
of that You can you can cut salary without like
you know, waving somebody essentially or trading them into nothing.
You can just downgrade a couple of other spots. I
just think if you're the Calves, you know the look
for years it was like who's that fifth guy that's
gonna be between the two bigs and the two smalls.
They have like three or four different players, and I'm like,
fine within that role now and obviously the results are
what they are. So like, how big of an issue
can the lack of a stud small forward really be?
I just think it's Thompson to duck the tax and
then like I'm just dusting my hands off. If I'm
the Calves at the deadline.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I guess. So you don't view it as like
they should maybe look to upgrade off of Niang.
Speaker 2: I mean, how much better can this team get?
Speaker 1: You know what I mean?
Speaker 2: Like there, I know, I I'm you're You're right, Like, yes,
if you're this good, then obviously you're not going the
other way. Uh. But but like it's just I don't
know who the player. It would have to be obvious
if you're a team this good needs an obvious move.
I think to justify doing anything of consequence, it means
like it's not quite it's not quite saying like you'd
be getting greedy because like you should always be like
the lip service teams always plays. We're all open to opportunities.
We're always trying to get better. Like, yes, that that's
a real thing, but it's like, how how much better
can the Cavs get? They're the best offense in the league,
they got a guy we both think is one of
the best.
Speaker 1: It's just I don't know, and yeah, in those spots,
if you're looking for a true upgrade, it's it's a
lot of the times, especially if affordability is an issue,
you're looking at guys who are not available, like it
Kenrich Williams, I think would be an upgrade. But the
thunder are not going to trade you. Kendrich Williams, I
wouldn't think.
Speaker 2: No, you're and if you're the Cavs, I don't think
you're putting the twenty thirty swap or the twenty thirty
one first rounder on the table. I think, like again,
easier to justify it for them than Phoenix because they've
already reached the level Phoenix wants to get to. But
I I don't. I don't know who the player is
that would make me change my opinion about holding onto
those picks.
Speaker 1: So this let you duck the tax. But if it was,
I just don't know how much you would have to
send to Detroit if it was like Neang For some
mony Fontechio, Neang is more of the combo.
Speaker 2: Big well Antekyo. I think is just better though right
like I would I so, yes, that would be an upgrade.
Can you do that with seconds?
Speaker 1: Do you think they could attach a bunch of seconds?
But if I'm Detroit, I don't know that I see
the value as I mean, Neang could play for them,
But and some mony Fontechio's minutes haven't been like ultra
high this year. He also hasn't been as good as
he was last year on balance. But if I'm Detroit,
I don't know that that moves me. And I guess
that's the issue you run into.
Speaker 2: I guess I'm if I was the Cavs, I might
be more open to considering because I don't My concern
would be because the Niang minute's have been fine this year.
Speaker 1: I just don't know what value he has to you
in the playoffs.
Speaker 2: Right, and he's gonna play he'll play less obviously, And
then yeah, just from a skill standpoint, he's someone that
like even if you didn't shrink rotations in the playoffs,
the the competition would necessitate like very spot use of
someone like Niang, where maybe maybe you could get someone
who is like less restrictive and you could actually make
a rotation staple against You know how, we're through four
rounds of postseason play. Niang probably isn't that guy. That's
that's fair to.
Speaker 1: Say most likely player to be traded. Then do we
think it's just Tristan Thompson.
Speaker 2: I gotta say, yeah, I don't. I don't.
Speaker 1: I don't know, like the emotional component behind that. If
they ve is like a good locker room guy.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean you might say they're not gonna do
anything and just pay the tax. But I think when
you're that close and Thompson, I mean, Thompson was out
of literally out of the league for like a good chunk,
I mean he could could they what I guess if
you can't just like wait, yeah, they have to trade him.
You can't just bring them back for just to be around.
I don't know, make him, trade him somewhere. He retires,
he becomes an unofficial assistant coach, so he's still on
the bench when he comes.
Speaker 1: Back next up in our exercise is the Detroit Pistons.
Speaker 2: Arguably the team most likely to make a trade just
we've joked about that a lot, just the fourteen million
in cap space. They can be a way station, they
can be a facilitator. That's I mean, it's too bad
that that still feels like the most notable trade deadline
angle for them, because the Pistons are now a legit
team that we need to talk about. Yeah, they're good,
we need to talk about, well, what do they need?
Like how bold should they be in adding? I still
just think the first angle you have to talk about
is like what can they do? What can they get
sort of for the rental of that fourteen million in
cap space as a third team or fourth or fifth team.
Who knows how big some of these deals will get.
Do you think that's the right framing four them? Or
are we doing them a disservice by not talking about
them more like a normal team with oh they need
this or that or you know what I mean?
Speaker 1: I guess I would be I don't know that we're
doing them a disservice, But what are you gonna get
for acting as a salary midseason? There's real value in
it because other teams most likely can't do it unless
we're gonna talk about teams tacking on money just through
their non tax payer mid level. But again, in most cases,
you're dealing with teams that maybe wouldn't want to pay
the tax at that point to begin with, so it
becomes weird. But like, what are you actually getting is
it to do that? I know it's not necessarily about
this year for them, and there's probably a middle ground
to where maybe you're taking back money that's going into
next year that teams don't necessarily highly value. But this
player helps you. Now if I'm them, though, I'm more
so looking like like, could you do like a mini buy.
I'm not trading future first round picks, but if I
have to trade Marcus Sasser to get someone who helps
me and I have a ton of it, doesn't it
feel like it's gonna end up being the middle ground
Because I don't think they. I feel like they end
up with someone who they don't have to give up
assets for, but they also think is gonna play for them,
because like they're good enough to think in those terms
rather than oh we need this number twenty six first
round pick.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know. I mean it's idea. In an
ideal world, you are getting an asset to take on
someone into your cap space as part of a larger
deal that you're like an ancillary or you're a facilitator in,
and that player is also a rotation upgrade. Like that's
a that's a lot of boxes to check.
Speaker 1: I'm just I'm struggling with the half one.
Speaker 2: Okay, I'm curious.
Speaker 1: I guess based on his current and play. Maybe not.
But let's just say this team decides which they might
be tracking toward because they're towers that we don't want
to pay the tax this year? Do you just take
Dennis Shrewder from the Warriors and the Warriors write that
off as it took us three second round picks to
get out of the tax, and the optics wouldn't be
great because you actively signed the Anthony Melton and then
in theory, would have just used picks to get off
that money. But would you even consider them giving them
a second or something like maybe the or would you
even consider taking on like does Kevon Looney or Kyle
Anderson play for this team or does GP two play
for them? Maybe not?
Speaker 2: No, GP two wouldn't play because I don't think Kyle
Anderson would either, just because we've been down the road
of not putting shooting or around.
Speaker 1: A point guard and then put shooting around it.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, sure that's true. You could use them for that. Yeah,
I I don't know. I don't don't they seem well, okay,
let's let's let's go down the road of like they're
not just gonna be Hey, here's fourteen million cap space,
like what can how can we help you? They're not
that team if they do go out and say, like
we're trying to actually win a playoff round, improbable as
that is for where they're where they might get in,
what what are the additions you're looking to make? Forget
the whole Like they got this cap space, they're gonna
be like a helper, Like, what what are the pieces
or piece this team should be looking to add If
the goal is like we want to be better without
compromising long term stuff, but like we want to get
better this year.
Speaker 1: I really do think, especially post Jay and Ivy injury,
that they need another like shot creator and maker to
work both with and without Kate Cunningham. I think you
could also argue Asar Thompson and Ron Holland they've given
you good minutes. You have Simony font tech hel you
have to Buias Harris. Right now, there's no like quote
unquote two way wing on this stay. I guess if
you want to call Kate cutting caml wing, sure let's
go that route. But right so's he has a more
important job actually, so like I think you could talk
with that. I think there's a way that you could say, right,
like could you upgrade off the Jaen Duran Isaiah Stewart collective?
Speaker 2: Uh?
Speaker 1: Sure, but I think I would be chasing like the
most important angle if you want to do something this
season for me and tell me if you disagree, would
be the shot creator maker type. That's like especially going
to be able to log minutes and maybe initiate stuff
without Kate on the floor.
Speaker 2: I think that's right, and like it is it's funny
that like you go from one hindrance for Cunningham over
several years, which is the lack of shooting, to now
they're shooting, but there's just nobody else that can make
a play, which is just like and a lot of
that's Ivy being hurt, But even Ivy was you know.
Speaker 1: That's not his forte right now, No, it really isn't.
Speaker 2: He was more actually he was providing shooting, I believe
it or not, Like that was really and secondary playmaking,
like I do think, I do think that has to
be the focus. But then you're really you're talking about
a backup probably because to you, like you said, you're
not like the guy that is a legit secondary creator
that can also defend, that can also make shots off
the ball. Is like you can't get You're not getting
that for what you're willing to give up. So it's
gonna have to be like more of a backup. Like
a shooter is a great example, Like it's just someone
that you don't envision starting, but he's just going to
lighten the load and maybe make your second units functional well.
Speaker 1: And also that's why and now apparently he doesn't want
to leave Chicago. We didn't talk about this, well we
haven't gotten them yet, but like they're perfect Zach Levine
team to me, because I don't you know, if you
have to give up a first round pick, okay, I'm done,
But if it's part of your cap space, you have
Tim Hardaway, Junior, Von Techio, Sasser like those names to
play around with. I would do that if I'm where
Tim Hardaway's gone. In that scenario, maybe you prefer to
give up Tobias Harris, but I think you still need
Tobias Harris with Levigne coming in to fill some of
those We want four spacing minutes in the front court
and more maybe more dynamic offensive minutes in the front court,
if you want to frame it that way, Like I
would give up Sasser in that deal. It gets tough,
Like with the salary matching. I'd like to figure out
a way to keep Malik Beasley and some mony font Techio.
But if it ends up being Fontechio, Sasser and Tim
Hardaway Junior, I think that gets you to the money.
I'm probably doing it if I'm Detroit, and then it's
all right, you've compromised your quote unquote medium term books.
But like Zach Colvin is still good.
Speaker 2: Right, and you're you're giving up I mean, it's it's
kind of I would just almost view it as like
you're just taking the Hardaway role and like dramatically upgrading it,
and you're doing in two do that You're giving up
guys that are just like you, don't You're willing to
give up those other salaries to make that happen. What
does that do to Jaye n Ivy's future with the team.
Speaker 1: That's where it gets weird. It's like, well, you've paid kid,
Levine's on the books for two more years. Ivy only
has one more cost controlled year. At that point, I
think you just flow it until restricted free agency unless
he's willing to like extend to just the number that
you can't even believe. And I don't think there's anything
wrong like having those three guys on a team with
the way that kid is defended this year, Like I
don't think, like that's not prohibitive at least to me.
Speaker 2: Now, it's fun, it's it's workable, and and like you're.
Speaker 1: Really expensive year by the way, if you keep all
three because that Levine's the only runs for two more seasons.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I think that's they So that's a good
example of like there are ways to look at the
Pistons beyond they're going to be a facilitator because that
is a trade that would make sense for them, and
that it's like it's you're taking on a lot of
money for one guy. That isn't like the answer, but man,
he would be helpful, like he just he's just such
an upgrade even like I don't know, soon might say,
like how much is is Beasley at the role he's
asked to play that much worse than Zach Lavine, Like yeah,
a lot, But like I I can so I can
see pushback is what I'm saying to a Levine type acquisition,
But for this team, for where they are, for what
they need, for what they know they have now in Cunningham,
like it's not crazy to take on a big number,
especially if like again, the market is not three first
rounders for Zach Lavine. It's it's this might be the
time to do it.
Speaker 1: Because by contrast, I think you could say at least
for this season, but even moving forward, like someone like
Anthony Simons might make more sense. He costs half basically,
well a little bit more than half, Zaqueen, you're not
getting him for that pack at least I don't think
like you're not getting him for Portland really wants to
save money, and it's yeah, okay, we'll do it for
Tim Hardaway Junior Marcus SATs right, Like, but you're not
getting Anthony Simon's for that. You're not getting Collin Sexton
for that. I don't like other names, Like you're not
getting some of these other impact names for that. And
that's why, Like, that's why Zack Lvine he's so expensive,
but that's why that opportunity would theoretically be availed.
Speaker 2: Sure, right, uh but most likely.
Speaker 1: Player to be traded.
Speaker 2: You kind of got me going on Fontechio and I
was looking at the numbers, like, I still think we
both view Fontechio as better than than his role has been.
But isn't it just Sassar? It feels like Sassar is
we just talked about they need more playmakers, but that's
not really what he is, even though he plays the
position of a playmaker. So I guess I guess I'd
go Sassar, but I'm open to Fontechio.
Speaker 1: I'm wondering if it's Tim Hardaway Junior, or is he
just played too much for them. He shot the ball
better this season than uh Fontechio, for sure, and I
think he I mean, he's played like recently, he's played
like a shit ton, but you have But yeah, it's
I guess it. I'm gonna go with I'm gonna go
with Fontechio because I just don't what are you giving
up Sassar for in a small deal he makes so little,
like what hit inclusion feels like, here's like this half
first round pick.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you'd have to view him, the acquiring team would
have to view him as a second draft guy, and
I just don't know that that makes sense since he's
already twenty four. Hardaway I would say that if the
if the Pistons are gonna do anything, even in the
neighborhood of a Levine type thing or like an actual acquisition,
then it probably should be hard Away because you're just
gonna need that bigger number to throw into a deal
for someone that actually makes a difference. And I mean
he's expiring, so like that's a team that's looking to
move now, I'm just like stuck on Levine. Like the
Bulls would value that expiring sixteen what is it? Yeah,
just over sixteen million.
Speaker 1: And honestly, the most likely scenario might just be their
trading no One and someone's just coming into that cap space.
Speaker 2: We've circled all the way back now to where we
started with them.
Speaker 1: This next team is my team, I believe, and it
is the Indiana Pacers, who look, we have their draft
pick commitments right, fans of the Indiana Pacers, they are
one hundred and forty seven thousand dollars below the tax.
So by the way, they are not going to pay
the tax this year. They have they can do it,
but like there's a chance they'll be in the tax
next year depending on how much Miles Turner costs to retain.
And so I think that needs to be even if
they're not taking on money in a deal this season,
I do think that needs to be, if not top
of mind in the middle, like in the mid mid
back of your mind, that they're not going to take
on a player who's making so much next year that
they're definitely going to be in the tacks. They can
trade first round equity, but they owe twenty six to
Toronto top four protection also top four twenty twenty seven
before becoming two seconds, So in theory they could still
trade up to two first round picks plus swaps. I
just don't let's start here. Is their biggest need still
what's always been their biggest need.
Speaker 2: Just a wing that can guard that's bigger than Aarony Smith.
Speaker 1: That me Smith is back, and so that eat and
like that also complicates things because now that eats into
Jaris Walker's minutes a little bit. But I do still
think that's their biggest need. What is the So who's
the most likely player to be traded on this team?
This was one of the tougher ones for me.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it is. I think, like you you do have
to I think you touched on this. You have to
loop in the like what's Miles turning going to cost?
Assuming they do want to keep him, which like the
fact that we're not really talking about him. This is
another example expiring salary, Like this is someone that you
might be looking to move because all we could walk
for nothing. I think it seems like the goal is
to just re sign him, but you've got the tax concerns.
So I gravitate towards Toppin just because that deal doesn't
look good. And I mean he actually he's played like
fairly well or but not to the level that justifies
the contract. I think still you.
Speaker 1: Don't think he's played up to his current contract.
Speaker 2: I don't think. I don't think what he does well
is what this team actually, it's a team context thing.
I could see where what he's doing would matter more
on another team. But it's like we I don't think
a guy who can't defend at really at all, but
like can't be your five. That is a dependent scorer.
That's awesome in transition, that the transition that fits the
whole Pacers makeup from last couple of years.
Speaker 1: Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about Miles Turner.
Speaker 2: Topping turn Turner has Turner is a is a solid value.
I think Topping. I think Toppin is the guy just
because if you're looking to keep your books under control,
which Indy always is, and you're gonna keep Turner, we
got to get rid of this this salary. So like,
but how do you who wants obi Topping at this number?
Who like, who's giving you anything that isn't also attached
to long term money? I don't know, but I mean,
like we can talk about Matheren. I think that's another one.
But I if it's me, I'm trying pretty hard to
move off Topping, just just because I don't I don't
feel like the Pacers need him, and I feel like
if you're trying to get the Turner stuff done under control,
like that's that's where you trim some money.
Speaker 1: I think. What's difficult about that, though, is then you're
inherently like upping or no. Obviously this you're diminishing your
return on whatever trade you make because part of the
value for the other team will be No, let's say
if it's Bene mather and will be top going out,
you're not gonna get a player that's online with Well,
what you might think benncmathern's trajectory is because of the
Obie top and deal. Again, he's been fine, but with
three years left on that contracts it's not viewed I
tell it's not viewed that positive around the league.
Speaker 2: No, I guess, I guess. Yeah, maybe he's not the
right answer to who's most likely to be traded. I
think he's the answer for me of like who would
I be trying hardest to move? But so what about
matherin though, like where do we where do we land
on him?
Speaker 1: Because he has plenty of standalone value and for a
move that like Indy's looking to make, it would be
so of between him and Jars Walker and even Ben
Shepperd you want to throw him in there? He seems
like the odd man out just based off what Indy
already has needs and the way that they're playing. This
is not say Benicmathern is bad, but when you're gonna
start looking at where you're investing your money because he
is extension eligible this summer, that's the name I've circled.
What becomes challenging is he's not making a boatload of money,
and it's tough to come up with, well, who is
a singular player you would trade ben mcmathern for. That's
really tough. And then I also can't spot the team
and be like, well, we'll give you a first round
pick for Benanick matherin. So maybe that is part of
the Benedicmathne trade is he is going out with Obie
top and you're just not getting necessarily a player as
in line with Benanickmathern's value back, just a player who's
a better fit and makes your payroll more flexible moving forward.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he's a tough like he does sort of he
could be this the quote unquote sweetener, except you have
to just pay him next and then you've got to
deal with what that number needs to look like. So
not an ideal sweetener.
Speaker 1: I don't think would you move him like I don't
think I really don't think Brooklyn would do this. But
if the structure was Topping and Mathrin and then there's
more money to stay under the tax to get Cam Johnson,
are you doing it?
Speaker 2: I mean, Johnson isn't the type of player we've said
at the outset that they need. Correct I still I
don't know. Am I ever gonna just not be like
skeptical of Matherin and his fit on this team and
his just like general value. I think I probably would
do that. I just think Cam Johnson is ultimately an
easier player to fit. He makes more sense in general
than someone like Matheren on this team and on most teams,
and I want off. Yeah, I would do that if
I were Indy. I can understand if you're a Pacers
fan and you're just like you're still in on Matherin.
I've been in on Kaminga for a long time and
I just check week to week on that. But I
would do it. I don't know. Do you think the
consensus is that didn't like among Indie fans. Let's say,
are they are they cool with Matherin going out with
top end for Cam Johnson?
Speaker 1: I don't. I guess I don't have a good feel.
I guess it's b They would say, no, I'd probably
do it because you're also kind of opening runway for
Jars Walker there, sure, because now it's Cam Johnson can
play it. So he's not what you necessarily needed the wing,
but he does serve. He's a good fit. He's not
gonna do as much of the off ball stuff that
you were getting from a buddy heel like bedemcmather is
not gonna do a ton of that isn't doing a
ton of that either, excuse me. So he like doesn't
need the ball, just fits and you kind of know, oh,
what his number is for the next two years, where
with Mathern's you know what it is for the next
one and then like there's a mystery so to get
off the top of money while opening up minutes for
Jaris Walker. I think I would do it if I'm Manny,
I just I don't think Brooklyn would do it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because you're not what was the report Brian Lewis
had that they would be loath to give up Cam
Johnson for less than two firsts, And so you're getting
we've just made hypothetical where're getting zero.
Speaker 1: And it's just I mean, there's I mentioned Hayward Highsmith
for Indy, but like as people in our discord pointed out,
and they're correct, like I don't think Miami's looking to
move a Hayward high Smith. So a lot of those players,
like one, you're not moving medic Matherin alone for Hayward
high Smith. That's not enough of a return for you.
But even if you're trying to make a move independent
of him, that's where the challenge is. I ultimately don't
think this team does much if anything. Could it be
just like can we just get a Tory Craig in here?
But even because the tax concerns, it's like, well, what
are you sending it out there? Like you like James
Johnson in the locker room. So my guests would be
and this is repeating myself that they probably do nothing
and then they fa they just re recalibrate over the
off season.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's reasonable. I do still the Turner
stuff and what it's going to cost to keep him
and how that affects your books, that still is something
you can mess around with that passed after the deadline
in the summer, like you can figure stuff out.
Speaker 1: And also they've been so with the Paris game against
San Antonio, not with say they've been so good yeatly
and that the idea of like oh eron neath Smith
is just back, like you can view that as your
mid season acquisition a little bit.
Speaker 2: M hmm.
Speaker 1: This next team is your team, Grant.
Speaker 2: Wow, we jumped all the way to Philly. So I
don't know if you know this, Dan, but uh, their terrific
off season that we love so much has not yielded
super good results. Still really interesting. I mean, we what
do we do half an hour on them individually the
other day? So they're about six million below the second
apron that which puts them about ten million into the tax.
That twenty five first with top six protection is owed
to the Thunder. Uh. That's just as a refresher because
this kind of I mean, we're not going to go
over all the picks, but this does sort of need
to inform like they're thinking at the trade deadline to
some extent, that pick has top four protections in twenty
seven and becomes a twenty seven second. They also owe
that twenty seven first to Brooklyn with top eight protection
through twenty eight, and then it's twenty eight second they
do have first to trade. I don't know how much
it matters what those are. It's twenty six, which is
the which is from Houston LAC the Clippers or sorry,
Houston the Clippers or the Thunder. That's the least favorable
of those. They have, the Clippers twenty eight, which is unprotected.
That's the Crown Jewel asset, a swap on the Clippers
twenty nine with top three protections. So that's all a
long way of saying the Sixers have the ability to
make offers and the salaries to add talent. Their current
status in the league, and Joel Embiid's inability to be
healthy suggests that this should not be a buyer. So
we can talk about like all their different routes that
they could go, and we did do some of that
already on kind of a one off pod, like before
we get into what they might actually need, what they
might actually do. Have you thought any more about or
have your thoughts changed on like what is the ideal
direction for them at the deadline?
Speaker 1: So I actually think now and this isn't necessarily they
need to tank, But the more I thought about it,
it's not happening this season. So why would you buy
the stuff that you can send out now if you
were a buyer, now the kJ Martin contract, you can
just guarantee it like and roll it over because he
has that second non guaranteed year on what if just
as an example, and I'm using this team as an example,
I'm not predicting it. Houston decides to make a consolidation
trade over the offseason and may end up trading young
players like a Cam Whitmore or Tarry Easton that fit
that you might like that goes to another team where
maybe that team prefers picks. Maybe it's Jabari Smith knowing
his payday's coming up, Like you can then cash in
your assets because of another trade that it happened. And
so I'm just waiting if I'm Philly, if I'm gonna
make that in so far as I'm even buying, Like,
see where your draft pick lands, See what's going on
with Joellemba's health, how Paul George finishes the year. Go
from there, I've now shifted gears into wondering, like they're
not in danger of going to the second Apron, but
ten million dollars into the tax just looking at the
players they have, would you could you try and duck it?
Speaker 2: Like would so you've got so let's say you do
that and you can if you can move kJ Martin,
You're eighty percent of the way there. Did it for
Caleb Martin? So like, as are those guys your route? It?
Speaker 1: Like Detroit, if you just said, hey, we'll put KYLEB.
Martin into your cap space, I know he's got money left.
Detroit says yes, right, yeah, because he could.
Speaker 2: Actually he's a he's a I mean he hasn't been great,
but he's a rotation player generally speaking.
Speaker 1: Sure, But I just don't know, like is that how
they're But I'm just curious as to I don't know
if they would want to give up KYLEB. Martin. They're
probably more so looking at okay, like obviously kJ Martin,
But would they prefer to give up up Kelly Ubre
as opposed to Kleb and that? Maybe? I mean that's
still a deal that teams would take. But could you
do it without giving up first? Like could you lop
off ten million dollars in salary from this payroll without
giving up first? I mean, you have some of these
guys fit into minimum exceptions when you're looking at Eric Gordon,
Kyle Lowry, Reggie Jackson's on this team, Gershan Jabucelli. You
won't have his bird rights. His markets shouldn't be huge.
So maybe you want to keep him, but you're not
keeping him with non bird rights. If you do so, I.
Speaker 2: Think you could I think you could get I mean
ten point two million and you can get.
Speaker 1: Look, they're not in the second apron, so it has
no really functional like they're not freezing draft picks. It's
just we know the realities of team building. Your team
is getting more expensive in theory after you extended Joel
Embiid And so if you're trying to hope that the
Sixers float this window as long as possible or that
ownership doesn't get cagy ducking, the tax helps that part
of the equation, right.
Speaker 2: Like, Look, if if you get to the point where
you're willing to concede as an organization this this ain't it,
this year is not the year, then not only can you,
but like shouldn't you just try just try to get
under the tax? Like doesn't that if you're just trying
to optimize your situation based on just where you are,
Like right, Like, shouldn't shouldn't you try to? I guess,
like I guess the answers know, if you believe Caleb
Martin or whoever, it ends up needing to be no, no, no,
that's that's not a replaceable part of our rotation, like
when we're trying to be good next year. Then I
guess you you just try to find other ways to
do it. But like all things being equal, I think maybe,
like why wouldn't you try to get under the tax,
like what what's the harm.
Speaker 1: It's and it would I guess it would take because
it would take three players, even if ken and Martin
Junior is one of them and then yabou SELLI like
in net that comes close to getting in to deduct attack.
But now we're getting into roster spot equations, and so
we're almost kind of saying that it would have to be.
I mean, there's Drummond, so you have drumming oubre Kenya
Martin ju or Caleb Martin. I'm thinking it takes like
two of those guys and then maybe needing to lop
off a minimum like at that point, I don't, but
I would I might try. And if you think if
you're dal moriy and you don't believe that ownership is
going to trust the process, like as to where they're
going to continue to pay into the tax moving forward.
That might be a I'm not dead set on doing it,
but it might be sort of a side quest for
me at the trade deadline.
Speaker 2: I like that framing of it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't have anything like what is there. Let's
say they do decide to buy because they think Joelle
and b is gonna be healthy and you know, lightning
in a bottle through the play in what is their
biggest need?
Speaker 2: I mean, it's so hard to judge because the team
just hasn't been whole. I guess if okay, I think
probably if you're thinking both short and long term, I
want someone that's gonna be able to guard the guys
that Tyres Maxi and or Jared McCain cannot so like,
I guess that could be a wing, but you're gonna
need to be able to do some like two three
stuff on offense. You're a lot of a lot of
people talking about like they still need another like a
four on this team. I don't know if I view
that as as large of a need as as just
like a good compliment to Maxie that I could imagine
allowing you to hide him defensively and still provide some
offense in a in a hypothetical postseason situation.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that gets in like those players just aren't
like to get that player without giving up like if
you would do let's say, if they can buy without
giving up a first round pick kind of by all
means like do you just call Charlotte and like say,
like what up with Josha Kogi? Yeah?
Speaker 2: Well that's I mean that handles your defensive problems. I
don't know how much you trust is shooting, but yeah,
like a like a burly two three that could could
do stuff defensively.
Speaker 1: Sure, who is the most likely player to be traded?
This is an easy one.
Speaker 2: I mean it's just Martin is the deal is signed
to be traded is That was like the running joke
from the moment he signed it. It has to be him.
Speaker 1: Do you think that he's going to be traded now?
Speaker 2: Though it looks a lot harder now right like it
seemed like just a given. I yeah, probably because he
just he fits in a lot of buckets. Says like
if you're trying to duckt the tacks, then yeah, you
trade him if you're trying to match salary and you
don't really care and the team wants money off the books,
like it. Just he feels like he's the most likely
in a number of scenarios.
Speaker 1: You could talk me into them doing something where it's, oh,
we'll give you like Reggie Jackson for Tory Kraig or
whatever type deal, and they're just trying to feel a
little bit of rotation when it's that way, since Reggie
Jackson doesn't play a ton for them. But I think
it's just it's kJ mart is the right answer. Whether
he ends up being.
Speaker 2: The correct one is we'll have to see. Next team
is quite literally my team, the New York Knicks.
Speaker 1: They're fascinating from the perspective of they don't have a
lot of stuff that they can do. They're five hundred
and thirty five thousand dollars below the second apron, so
they can't take back more money than they're receiving, but
they can't aggregate. They don't have a ton of just
draft equity to move. They have Washington's twenty twenty five first,
that's top ten protected, top eight twenty twenty six, and
then it's two seconds is going to be two seconds
and they can give up swaps in twenty six and
twenty thirty. Now let's start here, though, what is their
biggest need? I think you could go a bunch of
different ways, where it's another type of initiator that's just
an upgrade from campaign Orduce McBride those minutes, a reserve wing,
which I think is my answer that like Thibodeau will
actually play who's coming off the bench, and they could
also use big man depth because what is going off
Mitchell Robinson? You have pressed that you who can play
some five minutes, but that's still going to be unless
you think Mitchell Robinson's going to be healthy. Those are
the needs. Like I've mapped out the entire rotation. Do
you agree that it's a reserve wing would probably be
bigger or I think my second pick would be someone
else who can maybe break down the offense coming off
the bench. I just don't know, Like campaign on the minimum,
like how much better are you getting in that spot?
Speaker 2: Right? I get you know as much as as I
harp on just how hard everything is for Jalen Brunson,
I feel like the answer probably needs to be someone
else that can make a play that's better than campaign
that you could imagine, you know, like whatever position that
needs to be. But I'm torn on that.
Speaker 1: To have size at this point then a.
Speaker 2: Little bit right, Like I mean, I don't know, you're
pretty big everywhere else you could work stuff. I mean
like so, but I was gonna say, like, it feels
like that is the right answer. Just I mean, if
Jalen Brunson is hurt or whatever, you're done anyway, so
it doesn't really matter. But like you're you're talking about
the the six or three like postseason minutes per game,
he's not gonna work.
Speaker 1: Well, no, because the benefit of having someone with size
that could do that is play them next to Jayalen.
Speaker 2: Brun Sure, Okay, yeah, and so then you're, yeah, that's
fine because then you can the other But what I
was gonna say is I still just feel like it's
not a trade need per se.
Speaker 1: But it's just like.
Speaker 2: They don't know what it looks like with Mitchell Robinson
next to Cat and I feel like you really want
to know what that might look like because if you
don't love it, then you can punt on that and
then Robinson's just your biggest salary trade chip. And you
move him again. This gets complicated because it's like you're
offering Mitchell Robinson to a team for someone kind of
like Mitchell Robinson and probably plays the same position and
makes similar money. So like we always talk about like, well,
what does that even? What kind of deal is that?
I think it's I think it's support for bruntson in
the playmaking department. But I'm also open to if Robinson
isn't the guy that can you know, be the best
version of himself and maybe make sense with Kat and
like two big front court looks someone that can be that.
I like the idea of that if you're thinking from
a playoff perspective, like can we get really big and
retain as much shooting as possible because Kat can do
that at the four and kind of get I don't know,
you're never gonna get like Timberwolves level defense last year,
but the idea of Kat next to another big is
still something I really would want to explore.
Speaker 1: I guess the I mean the names though, of like
I'm just thinking like could they get I know he's
been injured, but like, would Memphis trade you Vince Williams Junior?
What do we how would I get Aaron Wiggins on
my team.
Speaker 2: Well's Wigs doing the place? I guess he's he can
he can beat as off the dribble. In addition, it
give me the rim pressure.
Speaker 1: So that's not to put if it. If I can
get Aaron Wiggins, I'm taking Aaron Wiggins. You just you
can't get Aaron Wiggins, which.
Speaker 2: Not with Mitchell Robinson probably, although like what if the
Thunder just keep not having bigs and they just decided
to take a shot on Mitchell Robinson will get.
Speaker 1: The antithesis of the Thunder.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: I guess the real question is do you expect them
to make their because they're gonna make another move, But
is it coming this season or is it gonna come
over the off season. I'm asking that because if you
wait till the off season, In theory, Mitchell Robinson might
have actual trade value because maybe he gets healthy, comes back,
makes an impact. However, pressure that she was coming off
the books. You're like, I don't know if they're gonna
be in the second apron or not. I get like
they could like avoid it, use the mini midline exception.
I don't know who you're gonna get for that. I've
seen some Knicks fans want Lonzo Ball. If you get
it with the minimi level exception, then you figure out
a way to stay under the second apron. Of course,
that opens up some draft pick flexibility. But you're like,
Mitchell Robinson is your last great salary matching tool unless
you think that Josh Hart or somebody is gonna emerge
as expendable he is.
Speaker 2: And and you know, I hadn't really I've been thinking
solely about like the framing of this season, what can
you get for Robinson? It's got to be by this deadline.
His salary also goes down next year. It's like twelve
point nine from fourteen I think fourteen two or fourteen three.
And like that in combination with maybe he shows something
down the stretch means like it does does make more
sense to move him over the offseason. I don't know.
I this is another case where it's like the need
for an upgrade on a team that's really good but
has clear holes is so obvious that you want it
to be this deadline because like just your impatient and whatever.
But the finance, the financial side of it does like
there is a there is a scenario where it's like, Okay,
if they don't do it at this deadline, right, I
still would want it to be sooner than later. But
I could understand the logic of waiting.
Speaker 1: I think I would wait and I would see if
I guess the problem is when you're talking about if
you're gonna hold on to Mitchell Robinson, maybe it makes
it a little bit easier to trade Preshousachua. But like
I just like someone I would have circle that they're
just gonna go the like the like the small move route,
Like could you get Javonte Green who's been playing well
for New Orleans, Like that's someone who kind of comes
in can play someone like the undersized front court minutes
counts as a close to a reserve wing. But you
just don't have like you're not training Tyler Kohlik or
Pocom Dottie for him. Does New Orleans do it just
to get Jericho Simms and they believe that they're shedding
their tax money elsewhere? Can you send Jericho Simms somewhere
else where a team like that might be. I think
Javant greenes on the books for just like five thousand
dollars less than Jericho tim so that something like that
would work I would consider that, and that I honestly think,
I know a lot of people believe it's going to
be easier for them to make a move over the
off season. The only reason I agree with that is
I think there's just a chance that Mitchell Robinson is
not at the rock bottom point of his value financially speaking,
if you want to keep around precious that you one
maybe if he even want to keep around campaign. I
don't think there'll be a huge market for him, but
I don't know that it'll get any easier, but there
are pathways to them ducking this second Apron, and there's
just there'll be more opportunities out there. I would think
in the off season. That would be my guess.
Speaker 2: This is kind of not on topic exactly, but would
I am fixated on I want to know what it
looks like with Robinson, just maybe because I'm thinking about
last year's Wolves. I want to know what it looks
like with him and Kat. Is that something that like
are you interested in that? Or and like as a
possible way to like, oh my god, this is this
unlocked the Knicks, you know? Or is that just like
is that asking too much?
Speaker 1: I just I'm interested in it. I'm just curious how
much of a core principle it can become when it's
so counterintuitive to the way that you've built your team
and sold this team by the five out spacing because
you can't play Josh Hart or Precious a Chua with
those two and I mean the other thing as well,
Like Karlthi Toebbs is not a high volume three point shooter.
He's a great three point shooter, but is his How
does his shot profile change in those minutes with Mitchell
Robinson coming up the lane for him where we know
what he likes to do. There's the post work gone
if Mitchell Robinson's on the court, and then his drives
more not as much space, and he's not much of
a facilitator excuse me out of those drives.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So I'm interested because defensively it feels like it should work,
and there might be certain matchups where it's valuable. So
I'm interested. I'm just curious, is are we talking about
something that helps you in the postseason, which I think
is how the Knicks need to view themselves.
Speaker 2: I agree, and that's why I'm so fixated on it, because,
like you're right, the trade offs are there are. This
isn't just like oh you add it's not totally an
additive thing. You are going to give back a lot
of important stuff by moving cat to the four. Like
specifically what you mentioned is just like, well, there's certain
guys that are just not going to fit and they
in that configuration they do. Now. I just again, that's
why I want to see it, because maybe what you
get is a top ten defense, a sustainable top ten defense,
and you make up for the spacing stuff with like
oh now you just kick ass on the offensive boards
again and like your first shot. You know, efficiency isn't great,
but you're getting several more cracks than you were previously
because you're getting extra possessions. Like there's the trade off
of it, I think is what I'm so interested in
as I talk about it now, because the like there's there,
does it seems possible? I don't know if it's probable
that on balance it might work better? But and this
is the core problem is like you haven't seen it yet,
and you might not before the deadline. You probably won't
because even like if Mitchell Robinson came back tomorrow, you
could still say, like, this isn't a large enough sample
pre deadline for us to make any decisions, you know,
So anyway, I I it's it's an interesting issue to me,
and it does inform their trade deadline, so I wanted
to circle back on it most likely player to be traded.
Having said all that, I.
Speaker 1: Don't I honestly don't know. Is it I guess I
have precious just because it's Mitchell Precious precious right or honestly, no,
I'm gonna go with Sims. I think that that's like
maybe they send him off so that it makes it
easier for them to take in like another contract or
just as part of like a minimum swap. But I'm
gonna ask you this, would you do? I don't know
if Portland would do this. I'm including Tyler Koalick, the
Washington pick. I would consider including the twenty thirty swap.
I just don't think twenty six will move the Blazers
at all. And then if you have to do you
have seconds plus Mitchell Robinson to get Robert Williams the
third and Tomani come up?
Speaker 2: Hell, yes, I would do that.
Speaker 1: If I'm the Knicks, you would include like Tyler Kohlik
the swap, the Washington pick, and you would do it.
I'm I don't think Portland would ultimately do it. And
I think that Portland has now reached a point where
Tomani Kamara is actually someone that they should maybe look at,
not to the Knicks, but if you just get another
outright first round pick for him for the trajectory that
you're on, they should probably be looking at that more.
But I think that that's I I feel like I
might be Tomani Kamara pilled like that. I'm thinking about
that package. It's I'm not saying Portland should accept it.
For the position that the Knicks are in. You're just
playing all You're firing all your last bullets at r
W three and to Moni Kamara might be a little
bit awkward.
Speaker 2: You had be you had me at Kamara.
Speaker 1: I agree, But I think the actual, maybe the more
intelligible route would be like, hey, can we somehow get
Duop Wreath and Javonte Green and we're not giving up
all this stuff like that would be the that'd be
the way to go anything else on that. Who do
you think is their most likely player?
Speaker 2: I think it's I'll just stick with Robinson. I mean,
especially if the guys is not going to play and
you you know, you don't have any reason to believe
he's the key to unlock the best version. He's probably be.
Speaker 1: Moved Orlando Magic up next. What do we lock? Right?
Speaker 2: All right, we've got them twenty and a half million
dollars below the tax so that's a that's some hefty
breathing room there. They have all their own first. They
also have denvers twenty twenty five first with top five protection.
Uh still top five and protected in twenty six and
twenty seven. I love these ones. They extinguish this disappear
as if not conveyed. I mean, it's gonna convey this year.
So they have that. This is just like they just
need their dead last and three point shooting. They're like
three percent worse than the Wizards who are twenty ninth.
It's like thirty.
Speaker 1: Percent more than last year. To they're credited cool.
Speaker 2: Nobody's I think opponents are like, great, keep it up.
Would you like to take more?
Speaker 1: Could you just could you check your proprietary metrics to
see what you have them at at three point shooting?
Speaker 2: Though, I'd like to know the I have them at
right around thirty percent proprietarily, I have them at not good.
I have them at problemically terrible. So it just needs
it if they do anything and now we've this got it.
This is the same story forever, right, Like it's just so,
which is, by the way, that's a problem right well,
and you brought you were talking about them with their pace, right,
it's just like hurry up. Also in addition to shoot
some threes. So that just means you need it just
be in the back court because your forwards are set.
You got a million centers that are all good. Uh
So it needs it. Can be a shot creator. We've
gone back and forth on this, just three point sniper
and or shot creator, uh to move sugs to the
two or whatever you want to do. It just needs
to be someone that can make a play in or
make a three. Ideally both that'd be great. Uh So,
like Anthony Simons again, just will never not bring up
Anthony Simons when we talk about the Magic. I guess
the question is like, is it now Franz is back?
So maybe the question is like, no, they're out of excuses.
I know where you're going now that Franz is back.
I didn't expect them to be back this soon.
Speaker 1: Me neither, You have no excuses. You go out there
and you make a fucking move. Okay, I will not
I will destroy this team if they do nothing at
the trip. I'm letting magic fans. I'm not telling them
to do something stupid.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you go.
Speaker 1: Out there and you acquire someone who stretches the floor
and can playmake in so far as they don't need
to dominate the ball. Even when Franz Wagner and Palo
Bank Caaro, you are out your two best players, both
of whom, well, the sample size on Palo Bankcaro is small.
Franz Wagner was in the All NBA discussion before his injury.
You are out of excuses. I don't care that more
Wagner's done for the year. I don't care that Jalen sucks.
Is the deal with back injuries? Get a fucking floor spacer.
I am like, i I'm sorry. Why am I so
heated about the earth?
Speaker 2: This is the same Well, it's because it's the same thing.
It's been the same thing forever. The need has been obvious,
and you could in the past, I think you know say, look,
we got just pick your Anthony Black, we got Jet Howard,
we got young guys Tristan to Silva. They have young
guys are like, well, you know, we can let's see
how they develop. It's just like it doesn't matter how
they develop. Your needs are still clear, so you can.
I don't think my preferred route would just be like
you just peel off some guys that are defense first players,
and like maybe that's John Isaac, maybe that's Goga, I
don't know, maybe somebody wants Wendell Carr. Like I just
think you, I don't know. You pull from a strength
to address a weakness, and you've got the draft assets
to sweeten whatever you want to sweeten. You've got the
salaries to throw. Like it should be easy because the
thing you need you you can go get offense only guys.
Speaker 1: That's fine.
Speaker 2: You can go get guys like and we'll mention something
we mentioned Simons, he's an offense only guy, calling Sexton.
You can Jordan Clarkson, I don't care, Like, go get
somebody that just scores ideally better shooter than Clarkson, but
you know what I mean. Like, so I'm with you
that with both your big guns back, you got to
do something.
Speaker 1: I'm at this point too, where it's you could like
we're talking about. We focus on playmaking, which I do
think they need, although I'm wondering personally if I underrated
Franz Wagner in that department to where it's you probably
want someone who could dribble, So these names might be
too far field play. Go get Cam Johnson, Go get
Duncan Robinson. I don't like. At least if you do that,
you are showing me that you care. And what is
look player development? Okay?
Speaker 2: Sure, like Jet Howard's minutes have not necessarily been consistent
this year, he's played, He's definitely played more.
Speaker 1: Uh. But like you, if you have to like put
force them to choose, is this team more likely to
play Tristan da Silva or Jet Howard? And we have
our answer. The answer is Trisian to Silver, who's not
a great shooter. Go out there and get them. The
two names you mentioned, Simon's and Sexton are like the
ones that I monitor the most, and those are the
ones that they don't break the bank in terms of
matching salaries and pick equity. In theory that you would
have to give up, but there's probably even like smaller
upgrades that you could make that would do like somewhat
wonders for this team, and they're just they're out of excuses.
Go get someone along those lines.
Speaker 2: What piece do you think is most likely to go
out if they do pull a trade?
Speaker 1: I would have initially said Cole Anthony, and I think
if you're getting a Sexton or maybe even a Simons,
that's still the right answer. But because he's played so
much of and needed to play so much, I just
think it's Gary Harris. Like, I don't know that you're
gonna move Wagner while he's injured, even though he's he
can be used functionally as an expiring contract. Where do
you land on that? Though?
Speaker 2: I think it's Harris. The team option for next year too,
is just like he's basically expiring salary right to have that. Yeah,
it's a team option seven and a half million for
twenty five twenty six. I think.
Speaker 1: Malcolm Brogdon. I think people are going to ask us,
but what go get him? Sure?
Speaker 2: Why not? I mean, like, I don't know what you
would give the Pistons that they would want because you're
dealing defense first guys that aren't going to space. But
like Tim Hardaway Junior would I would like start him
put trade for Tim Hardaway junior and start him. Like,
just get someone out there that's going to get eight
ten threes per thirty six and stardom for whatever, for
someone that can shoot it. Yeah, I think it's Harris.
He just feels I'm not the big is Cole Anthony fan?
But just you know what is he six years younger
and like is actually, like you said, is actually playing.
So I think it's Harris. But Harris isn't gonna that's
seven and a half million. That's not gonna get you much.
You're gonna have to pull Chupontechio. You're right. Well, but
if you're going for the Sextons or the Simons, like
you're from somewhere.
Speaker 1: Honestly, they can take back fifteen million dollars if they
send out Gary Harris.
Speaker 2: So that might get you something, it's because most but
it doesn't get you to the guys that are making
twenty good.
Speaker 1: You have other stuff to do it, go do it,
and it's just it needs to at least be I'm
not saying it needs to be a household name, just
someone who moves your offensive needle. Please agree, our next team,
which is also my team, We're onto the Toronto Raptors.
They are ten million dollars below the tax. They own
the Pacers' twenty twenty six first round pick, top four
protected through next year. Then it turns into Utah's twenty
seven second and Dallas's twenty eight second. I'm looking ahead
for them at next season because I think that will
form what they do with the trade deadline. They're not
a cap space team, but they have a shit ton
of like room under the tax. I'm wondering if they're
sort of the sneaky team where it's, oh, they have
Bruce Brown's expiring, and people have looked at it through
that lens, what could you get for him? What if
they just say we'll take on money that has a
year or two left on our on the deal, like
because we're never going to be a desirable market. We're
kind of on this fluid timeline anyway, and they have
so much room beneath the tax this year and next year.
That's what I think I'm looking at with them leading
into the trade deadline. What say you?
Speaker 2: That makes a lot of sense and you called it fluid.
It feels like that's a positive spin on the timeline
because you've just max Scottie Barnes. You've got quickly on
the books for a not a max, like a big deal.
So it's kind of like how we would talk about
the Pacers last year of like you just supermax Halburn
and you got Siakam on this, what's about to be
a max? Like you're not in like waiting around mode anymore.
The difference is the Raptors are not good and they
have all these guys signed so yet like it would
feel suboptimal to be taking on like quote unquote bad money,
But because of where the team is just in the standings,
and yes, injuries have had something to do with that,
that does feel like the right move I think is
to be willing to do that. And I think particularly
because you do have guys like Brown, like Bouchet, like
a Linox that you could, you know, send out and
just if you're willing to take back twenty five twenty
six or even twenty six twenty seven money, you could
you could extract some real assets that way. So it's
it's not ideal that that feels like the right way
to go, but I do think that's kind of where
we are.
Speaker 1: What do you think is the biggest need for the
roster itself. God, so tough to know because of how
little we've seen of Quickly too, because you could go
that route.
Speaker 2: I mean it need I guess, well it's this is
the other weird thing is it's like, I like the
theory of the team if it's like Quickly and then
you've got Grady Dick and oachiag Baji and then there's
r J. Barrett, and you've got Scottie Barnes, and then
I guess Peardl's your center forever because you're never gonna
trade that.
Speaker 1: I think you could make a case that they need
an upgrade in like rim protection.
Speaker 2: Sure, but they seem so happy with Perle that like,
I don't, I couldn't.
Speaker 1: Who is there who comes the closest to typifying the
three and D wing mold on this team?
Speaker 2: Now, I mean it's Agbagie. Yeah, he's undersize for that role.
That's kind of.
Speaker 1: That might be their biggest need at this point because
that's never going to be RJ.
Speaker 2: No, and it's not on. Barnes's role is totally different
and the shooting has never been consistent. So yeah, it
is weird that I really like Agbajie in that role.
But I think I think you're probably right that he
he just isn't quite big enough, and the track record
of him being this version of himself is not very long,
so maybe you don't view that as like a sustainable thing. Yeah.
I guess this is a really hard team to evaluate
on a lot of fronts. I really struggle with them.
Speaker 1: I'm just I'm look here to thinking, well, who's the
most likely to be player to be traded. I feel
like it could be Bruce Brown, but Chris Bousche kind
of feels easier to move. He's played more this year,
and it feels like there are more teams in the
market right now for just some type of reserve big
than there are for teams someone like Bruce Brown, who's
making twenty plus million dollars just even this season.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that number is so big again this fifth time
I've said this. Probably in the past he'd be like,
oh my god, Bruce Brown is just what a what
a chip to have, you know, big number that's gonna expire.
Everybody's gonna want that, and it just I think maybe
the Bouchet number, which is like, I mean less than
half ten point eight, even Alynic twelve eight Tholl seem
likelier to me than Brown. Maybe Brown plays great like
over the he's backfine, he's been back for a little bit,
but like maybe he looks more like Denver Nuggets Bruce Brown,
and you actually can move him. But just the mechanics
of it are harder because the twenty three million is
like that that's a significant number, where like the ten
and twelve million is something you can kind of like
toss off. I feel like, yeah, I'm with you there.
Speaker 1: I'm wondering if just like I don't even know how
they get like what is their angle in a Bruce
Brown trade, like you're hoping to get your I have conversation,
like I mentioned before, is it, oh, we're like kind
of okay with someone who has money on the books,
and then they can kind of help us. And then
what's sort of the you know, they also, by the way,
because they're so far below the tax like they do have,
they can just take that like send someone in the
non tax payer mid level exception is my point. So
maybe you're sending someone out who's semi cheaper, and like
you're taking in like someone who's around that number that
feels more like a you could go like I don't
even know, like the Lakers looking to get off like
a Gabe Vincent type contract. I don't get Vanderbilt or
Vanderbilt like those players aren't players you're probably interested in
monitoring long term.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's weird what Terrence Man.
Speaker 1: If the Clippers were looking to duck the tax, But
what are you sending the Clippers in that You're not like, yeah, like,
what are you sending the Clippers that they would really want?
If you're taking back PJ. Tucker and Terrence Man for
Chris Bouchet.
Speaker 2: Sure, Like I don't know what that does for anybody.
I I could see what it does with the Clippers.
Do you think it would be easier to move Brown
if you were making like four three instead of twenty three?
Speaker 1: Well you just want them to trade for Zach Lavine.
I don't know.
Speaker 2: It's just like, who's the guy. Who's the guy that's
making twenty three ish on a multi year deal that
a team is like, we've got to get off this.
It's you know that that's not like that's a weird
like nether region of salary slot where it's like.
Speaker 1: Those aren't no. I mean the Lakers probably have two
of them on the books right now. That's impressive, Like
those aren't traditionally like bad deal, that's what I mean.
Speaker 2: Like if it were forty like yeah, sure, we could
find we can find some forty forty five, we can find.
That's where the like, I don't know, just like Tobias
Harris last year, it'd be like, oh, yeah, we'll do sure,
or two years ago. I guess because he was expiring
last year that that's a weird The twenty three, I guess,
and you can combine stuff, but like the who, I
just don't There aren't twenty three million dollar players that
teams are dying to get off because they got two
more years on their deals. Generally speaking like that, the
number is usually bigger than that on the bad money.
Speaker 1: No, I'm kind of I mean, like maybe the Heat
want to get off of Terry Rosie.
Speaker 2: We did Rosier again. Yeah, that's another one that's actually
a pretty good one.
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, I mean I'm going through it right now.
There's no one that likes certain stuff, but they could.
I guess the benefit of having a Chris Bouchet is
that they could take back someone who's more expensive. Yeah,
so you're like you're at I mean Chris Bouchet is
what is he at twelve this year?
Speaker 2: Uh? Ten? Eight ten eight?
Speaker 1: So him plus Bruce Brown, Like, you're just in the
thirties there, So but I what are the deals that
we would you do this if you just trade them
for Jeremy Grant?
Speaker 2: And I'm getting motivation.
Speaker 1: They is just saying, oh, we fucked up with Grant. Well,
we don't want that deal in our book. So let's
say they're will Let's say they're willing to do that.
They're probably not. That's a lot of egg on their face.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna need it. I'm gonna need it first if
I'm Toronto. Yeah, you're telling me to take on thirty
one thirty what is it? Five for one sixty? Were
like what in year two of that extension? I'm gonna
need something.
Speaker 1: I mean that's like, I just what is the team
that that is willing to use a first to lop
off money? Like you're not gonna do that with CJ.
McCollum in New Orleans.
Speaker 2: That's another guy. Yeah, I didn't think about him. Uh yeah,
where are the bad contracts? This is another problem. We
don't have enough bad contracts anymore. That's that's making this
harder too.
Speaker 1: Well, you think would the Kings give you a first
to get off the Sabonus money that you think is toxic?
Speaker 2: If things had gone really bad, maybe you just send
to Rosen back to the end of the Bruce Brown
slot in Toronto, just have a nice reunion there. I
don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I think the more likely pads like, okay,
what can it's just Bruce Brown in a vacuum for
somebody in seconds. I just don't even know what team
that is, though.
Speaker 2: Well, that leads to like, someone like Bouchet is just
probably more likely to be traded, right, It's just easier.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I think he has doesn't he has more
standalone value, Like if you're looking for this season, I
would argue right now he has more value than Bruce
Brown does.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because V well, I don't actually I have no
idea what he's shooting from three. But the theory of
Chris Bouche involves I don't have my proprietary three point shooting.
Speaker 1: He was on a heater, so if we only use
like the last you know, two weeks or something, I
think he might be shooting like fifty percent from three.
Speaker 2: What I was gonna say is he at least there's
a lot of teams with the Clippers are one got conventional,
big handled Zubots is awesome. Zubots has shot two threes
in the last four years. Mobamba was shooting like thirty percent,
so like, okay, yeah, Chris Busche could come in and
be sort of what Mobamba.
Speaker 1: Was till He's at thirty five point six percent, So
that's like high enough. And his per thirty six minute rate, Yeah,
it is at all time Oh, it's close to an
all time high seven point nine attempts per thirty six minutes.
I mean, if it's what did you say? Bouchet said, well,
I have his number pulled up. He's at ten. I
mean the Clippers might be looking at duct attack, so
it's like, would you attach don't they have like a
couple nifty like or a second available like PJ. Tucker
and small salary X to duct attacks in exchange for Chris.
Speaker 2: That's a win win right there.
Speaker 1: Well, how's it a win for the Raptors.
Speaker 2: No, I mean that's a win win for the Clippers,
not so much for the Raptors. I guess in the
second whatever.
Speaker 1: The Clipper will they have no incoming pick, so I
must be wrong about that they can trade it. So
would you do as the Clippers twenty thirty one second? PJ.
Tucker and like what's the other Bones Highland? I guess
for Chris Bouchet.
Speaker 2: I do that. I don't know, but your point about
why the Raptors are doing that, I guess if it's
just because you can't do any better than that for Bouchet,
like maybe.
Speaker 1: Yeah, twenty thirty one second, I guess I would consider it.
I'd probably want a little bit more.
Speaker 2: Or a nearer term pick.
Speaker 1: That seems like the type of move the Raptors are
going to end up making, though, yeah, I agree, Would
you honestly though, would you do the like what is
Terrence Man's value in a vacuum? Because it's just not
that high to the Clippers at the moment. But I
could see some teams, the Raptors being one of them,
thinking he has value. But if you're the Clippers, you're
not trading him straight up for a Chris Bouchet, right,
or even if it if it's Terrence Man and Bones
Highland for Chris Bouchet, are you doing that?
Speaker 2: Maybe?
Speaker 1: I mean you're really obliterating your ball, like your secondary
ball handling.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that is an issue. I guess it would depend
on if they think how much they think Bouche is
gonna play one and if they really do feel like
they need Again. This is another like how many minutes
is Bouche gonna play in the games that matter? I
like the different dimension he would offer, but then maybe
you would just say as the Clippers like well, Mobamba
could run hot enough to make the difference between his
current hit rate and Bouchet's thirty five percent like negligible.
I don't know. I like Bouchet better than Bomba, so
it would be an upgrade. I think it would. If
you told me Kawhi was like fine, which which I
would say, like, Dan, have you seen his last decade
of his career, then you could you could deal with
losing some ball handling.
Speaker 1: But honestly, I don't think i'd do it if I'm
LA in that situation, just because even just having ternsment
on the books through next season, it just for salary
matching purposes. Like he I think he'll always have more
standalone value than Bouchet these stages of their career.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's probably true.
Speaker 1: So I'm trying to see if, like the Tucker, I mean,
you could just do Tucker and the second for Bouchet.
But if you're not really duck in the tax in
that scenario, because if you get a twenty thirty one
second round pick for Chris Bouchet, I mean, that's probably fringe.
I don't know, that's a tough one. I do think
he's the most likely player to be traded, though.
Speaker 2: I agree with that. That's the only thing we've established
on this whole team.
Speaker 1: For our next team, the Washington Wizards.
Speaker 2: Buyers, right, I mean, you gotta yeah. So twelve million
below the Tacks, their twenty five first is going to
the Knicks with top eight protection or top ten then
top eight. They do have a trade exception still from
the Daniel gafferd dele that's worth twelve point four million.
They can be a cap space team this summer. Who knows, No,
I was just gonna say, who knows how valuable that
is to them given where they are in the rebuild,
and like you know, they're not a free agent destination
and don't care to be I don't think anytime soon.
So the question then is just like, how much of
that hypothetical cap space are they willing to see disappear
if there's the right trade that brings bad money with
picks attached, are those offers even out there right now?
I think the real thing for them is just like
what can you get for the adult in the room
veterans that you may or may not need anymore? That
is an interesting issue we can talk about, Like when
you decide that the young guys whose habits and stuff
you care about are like okay to the point where
you can trade your adults and your culture center guys.
I don't know, that's something we just don't really talk
about that much. But Valanciunis Brogden Kusma is a little
different category. But just like Kispert, but actually Kisper be traded.
Speaker 1: He's poison pilled.
Speaker 2: But yeah, he's poison pilled, right, So just what do
you get for those guys? And that's kind of it
for them, right, I don't want to oversimplify it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm just are any of them And it's really
only like, is Kuzma still getting you a first round
pick based off this season?
Speaker 2: Not for me? I don't know. I don't know who's
who I don't know, who's.
Speaker 1: Your proprietary metrics would say he's not worth a first
round pick.
Speaker 2: I have written not worth a first rounder on my
on my locked up special.
Speaker 1: You like there's gonna be either're getting out I guess
from some of the back end of the deal, even
though it's not a bad deal and maybe some nice
second I just I can't see them doing that. But
you could also argue, would there be have you reached
the point where there's value in just not having his
usage on the team as you're developing everybody else?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I mean, like I think I just
want if I'm the Wizards, I think I will I
would love it if Kyle Kuzma were just not on
my roster. If I could get anything for him, that'd
be super. But I just don't know what the market
is for him right now, and like, to be fair,
this might just be a situation where once he's on
another team, he's just he's not this guy anymore, which
actually maybe that should be the expectation, so I'm being
too hard on him. But as still I think, like, well,
let's talk about Valentiunis, because the second that deal was done,
it was he was there to be traded. He's just
he's gonna get you one second, right, maybe two? I
don't know. I just don't know. And that's like the
big business for them of the deadline is can you
get maybe two seconds for him? Because the first is
off the table? Would you agree? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I mean unless you're part of that appeal is what
contract are you taking back that's so toxic?
Speaker 2: Or it's just a.
Speaker 1: Jeremy Grant deal, like you're sending out Malcolm Brogden and
Yonas Valentinis to get back Jeremy Grant.
Speaker 2: There you go. Yeah, finally we found a taker for
Jeremy Grant. And the Wizards, by the way, could justify
it just not caring about how good they are for
like three more years, so that there's a fit.
Speaker 1: I I'm just with them. I would just whatever seconds
you could get for him, and Brogden I'd probably be
okay with. I don't know if he'll get you two
seconds though valentunists. I think Brogden maybe could, but maybe.
Speaker 2: Again, maybe part of the appeal is like what type
of like So let's use Brogden as an example.
Speaker 1: This is what I was gonna ask you. Would you
do if you're the Clippers, Man Tucker and Highland for
Malcolm Brogden.
Speaker 2: What's Brocken's at like twenty two and a half.
Speaker 1: So the Clippers still do duct attacks in that scenario,
by the way.
Speaker 2: But I'm getting Man Tucker and Bones and I am
as the Wizards. Am I getting a second two seconds?
Speaker 1: No? If I'm the Clippers, I'm not giving that. First
of all, the Clippers have one second is twenty thirty one.
I'm not giving up that. For would you do? Would
you take PJ. Tucker into your non a tax payer
mid levels the Wizards if you're getting Los Angeles is
twenty thirty one second?
Speaker 2: Gosh, it's so just like we're talking about twenty thirty
one second round picks. I guess if you're not. Yeah,
I suppose I would take whatever assets I could get
Brogden's expiring. Maybe you can flip.
Speaker 1: I mean maybe like Bone's Island is a flyer for them?
Isn't because I think if they're going to take a flyer,
or like because I don't think they should be buyers,
even though you said that at the top they should.
I'm probably still looking at is there anyone who just
has some wiggle on the offensive end on ball. I
know you have Jordan Pool, I know you have Bub Carrington,
but don't have do we know that they have their
playmaker the future? Bub comes closest to I'm not saying
Bones Island is it? But just like someone come on
ball shake.
Speaker 2: I think, did you say Man is in that deal
for the Brogden one?
Speaker 1: Yeah, it'd be Man, Tucker and Bones.
Speaker 2: I think maybe Man is like the sneaky key part
of that, because if you're the Wizards.
Speaker 1: You oh, I would I would do it. If I'm
a Wizards, I wouldn't think twice. It's the Clippers that
I personally have pause for.
Speaker 2: I yeah, no, I think, well, it's just can Brogden
be healthy?
Speaker 1: And is he?
Speaker 2: I mean he kind of does give them something they need.
Speaker 1: And they did reject him once though. But the other
thing too is if it's like Brogden, maybe he ends
up because it's La It's a team that he wanted
to go to at one point, Like when this conjures up,
are you getting like Malcolm Brogden just super cheaply to keep?
Would be another component of making a decision like that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, that could be. I wonder what his market
will be like. Most likely player to be traded.
Speaker 1: I think is Jonas Vlachunis because the number is so
small and the Lakers seem like they are obsessed.
Speaker 2: With him because Anthony Davis does not want to play
center for the thousand times.
Speaker 1: The problem with that, though, is just like they have to.
I would think you have to give up multiple picks
if the Wizards are taking back Gabe Vincent, he has
another year left on this deal. That would be my guess.
Speaker 2: Yeah, maybe so, But I mean, I think Vucevic makes
a lot more sense in LA than Valentunis does, but
just because of the spacing if you're gonna have two
bigs out there, But I just.
Speaker 1: Don't know getting to his money is so I guess
it's Vanderbilt and Vincent. Whether Vince has been a little
bit better on offense lately, but like, what does Chicago want.
Speaker 2: With That's the thing is it's more picks because you're
talking about a bigger number.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's interesting though. Next team up, we have entered
the realm of teams that might fuck shit up before
we're done recording this. The Chicago Bulls four point five
million dollars below the tax. According to Grant's proprietary financial metrics,
they are sending their twenty twenty five first round pick
to San Antonio. It's top ten protected, then it is
top eight protected through twenty twenty seven, turns into a
twenty twenty eight second round pick if not conveyed. They
also own that quote Sportland's twenty twenty five first but
that thing is lottery protected until the end of time
before turning into a twenty twenty eight second rounder. They
also do have but they're so close to the tax
maybe it doesn't matter. But they have that set zeteen
point five million dollar trade exception from tomorrow de rozen.
It doesn't expire until the summer, so there's no real rush.
But if they were looking to just you know, it
allows them to be more flexible depending on what type
of money is going out from their side and if
they want to roll over a trade except or you know,
increase the length until it expires. Grant, we could go
through the biggest needs for this roster, which feels like
who's their long term center? Do they have any long
term wings on this team? But it's really just like
what are a direction? I think because they haven't been bad,
but that's also kind of the problem. We're not sure
if they're going to keep their pick. That to so
to San Antonio. So where are you at with them?
And during the depth.
Speaker 2: I'm glad you prefaced it that way because it is
just like a macro thing for them. It needs to
you need to make the decision. What are are Are
we just going to finally do this and try and
like because we can concede that's the market for whoever
they might be willing to trade could be better later
It's possible, right, like another year off Levine's deal, maybe
he's easier to move. Maybe you get first for that
for him. Maybe it's just like same with Vucevic, go
on down the line. I just think fundamentally they got
to decide and like we know which way we would
send them. It's just blow it up, tear it down.
They need to decide what they're gonna do, and then
from there it gets pretty easy. It's just you take
what the best offer is for Vucevic, which is probably
gonna be a couple seconds. You're not getna first for him.
I don't know. I honestly don't know what Levine's market
value is right now, Like just looking at the individual production,
even with that salary, it's like that's a first round
asset player, I think at least one. So if that's
on the table, you do that too. And then we've
talked to like you, Wanzo Ball, Kobe White, I would
assume oo, just how thorough do you want to get?
And so I'm not looking at any of their needs.
I don't care what they need. What they really need,
more than anything else we could talk about, positionally, is
just a commitment to stop being where they are. I think,
because there's not a you can't look at this roster
and say there's a path to being better, like you know,
in a meaningful way. So just make a decision and
then take what you can get. I don't want to
oversimplify it, but that's kind of where they are and
where they've been.
Speaker 1: Do you think that decision has made any harder though?
By their proximity to the tax because they're not gonna
take back I mean, they can take back some money,
but we know they're not going to pay the tax.
It probably shouldn't be at four and a half million dollars,
and none of these got I think. I mean if
you're moving Levine is probably pretty easy to cut money
just because his number is so huge.
Speaker 2: Right, and I think I think it's so. Here's where
it gets really easy, I think is if you expand
the scope of who you're willing to trade two guys
like Kobe White, because that's like you are in control
of those negotiations you're gonna get. You're gonna get you
can say like we want to take back less and
you're gonna make this a pick heavy thing. Like it's
harder I suppose if you don't really get aggressive with
how many guys you're willing to trade, and you only
try to trade the guys that are too old, too expensive,
not helpful in.
Speaker 1: Is gonna leave this summer?
Speaker 2: Yah, yeah, so yes, yes, the tax has to be
a concern. I just think that if you're if you're
thorough enough and you're committed enough, like you're not gonna
have to worry about that. As Chicago, I don't think.
Speaker 1: That, by the way, that's I still think that's the
move would be to trade Kobe White if you can
get multiple first round picks and then whatever like a
player like a something like that. I'm not saying they
have to they could still be bad enough this season
for sure, and we'll have to see how it works
out for him with his contract moving forward and what
they would get him in future deals. The most likely
player to be traded. I bounced back and forth between
Lodzo and Voots because well, first of all, let's start
here or and here. Zach Lavine's a new nickname, Stockholm syndrome.
According to Jake, he wants to be in Chicago, which
is just did they come to him with we might
be sending you here and he just really doesn't want
to Like that is that makes no sense because he
seemed miserable.
Speaker 2: And nothing has changed like this is I mean what
the same coach, same executives, basically same team, Like it's
a weird change of heart. It feels like I don't
know what the what the game is if there's a
game being played, like trying to gin up value type
of thing. But yeah, I I don't get it. I
think it's Vucevic is most likely to be traded just
we've heard plenty of rumors about him. He's kind of
the poster boy for like, if we're gonna get off
the treadmill, he's the guy to go, so I would
pick him pretty easily.
Speaker 1: What's the deal you like for him to go to
the Warriors?
Speaker 2: It can just be you can get the salary whoever
you want. I think it's got to be.
Speaker 1: Like doesn't need to be three for one or my
who like like.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because because you got to I don't have the
numbers up R Peyton and Looney. And then you maybe
throw in uh. I'm trying to think who the obvious
third guy you dare, say Gi Santos or him. Can't
trade that guy. But and then and it's two seconds,
I think, get to the money how you need to it,
or Kyle Anderson can be in that too. I guess
if Kyle Anderson's in it, then I don't know that
the Bulls might want a little more pick equity wise,
but it's a couple seconds and it's it's just sal
you know, Lune and Peyton or the anchors.
Speaker 1: I think, uh, I think it's Vouch. I could just
see it being Lonzo because I'm wondering if he's easier
to move. They're about the same price, but he just
doesn't have any money left on his deal, and so
I'm wondering if the Bulls won't be because there was
reporting and they're not gonna get it. That the Bulls
want a first round pick for Nikola Vucevich was just
not happening, and so if they stick to their principles,
Like are they just gonna keep him because they couldn't
get a first round pick?
Speaker 2: That's what I said, is like there is a possibility
you might be able to get one later. I don't care.
I think you gotta just do it now. You're just
can't set yourself back another year.
Speaker 1: Is there any move they could make that would open
up more minutes for modest Bouzellis, who basically does not
play in second halves. This is the Julia Poe from
the Chicago Tribune for that.
Speaker 2: This is the problem is it shouldn't take a move
to open minutes up for him. It should take like
a correct organizational prioritization of like who matters. I don't know,
get Patrick move Patrick Williams.
Speaker 1: Is there a team that would even just take a
flyer on that deal at this point?
Speaker 2: Why would you? I don't it's worth I don't know.
Speaker 1: He was clearly good enough to get a five year
deal with a player option from the Bulls.
Speaker 2: So yeah, clearly good enough and especially impressive in a
market where no one was going to give him like
two thirds of that besides them.
Speaker 1: That'd be funny if that becomes because his number is
currently so low. If part of the Kobe White trade
value is you get off Patrick Clake.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we didn't mention Kobe White when we talked about
Orlando either. That's another no brainer for them. That is
a that's a great name for Orlando and actually many
other teams.
Speaker 1: I don't know that I have anything else on the balls.
I would agree Wuch is the most likely player to
be traded. Do you think I'm gonna set the over
under at point five of Nicolovic, Lonzo Ball, Zach Lavine?
Just the Bulls trading over are under point five players.
Speaker 2: That's a that's a bad line. That's an easy over.
One point five would have been a lot harder. Okay,
one point five, I push they trade half of somebody.
Do you think they trade one of Vouch, Lonzo or
Zach Lavine? That's right, Yeah, I think they trade Vouch.
I think I feel pretty good about that.
Speaker 1: Second to last team here is the Milwaukee Bucks, who
were becoming way more interesting than I kind of ever
thought they were gonna be. They are a second Apron team,
but they're only six point five million dollars into the
second Apron. So will they duck it by moving Pat Content?
Will they duck it by moving Pat Content? Bobby Portis,
Chris Middleton and getting Jimmy Butler and Za or Zach
Lavine or maybe.
Speaker 2: Bradley Bradley bial who can say they.
Speaker 1: Can trade their twenty twenty thirty one first round pick.
I don't know what to do with this team, man,
this is I think if you could duck the second
Apron by getting rid of Pat Content, and it's not
gonna like independent of other moves, I don't know how
you do, Like, what what do you have to do
that with? In terms of non first round equity, you're
not working with a ton there they have they can
trade their twenty thirty one second round pick, Like, that's
not getting Is that getting Pat Connotaine who has a
player option for next year? Off your books?
Speaker 2: Man? I mean that's really the only second they have,
is that?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 2: Uh?
Speaker 1: I like that you assume I'm wrong, but that's correct.
Speaker 2: No, it's just like because I was just I was
all ready to say all Content's clearly the most obvious
guy to be traded. They because you just get into
the second apron, then you can agg well, you can
aggreate as long as you don't go over. Man, that's tough.
Aren't you surprised that they've I mean, it is surprising,
and it isn't it that they're looped into so many
of these big deals just because of how coming into
the season it was just like they can't do anything.
They just they're so inflexible.
Speaker 1: But it does make sense when you consider that if
your best trade asset is that twenty thirty one first
round pick, you're not just gonna give I know, I
saw some people float like Pac Content for Io Desumu
and then you're giving up that's twenty thirty one first
round pick. I don't know if I could get there
as the Bucks. I understand why they might do it,
but I would assume who is good at top out
as your fifth best player.
Speaker 2: I just and that doesn't get you under the apron anyway, right,
because the difficult.
Speaker 1: You're you are correct, maybe the balls are taking back
Marjon Bochamp two or whatever, and you'd have to figure
out other ways. So that's it. That's an even better
point there. So I don't I don't know, but I
really think the question with them is, let's start here.
Do you think, well, we'll have to start here. Do
you like the idea of them getting Bill Levine or Butler?
If you're this team, are you for what it's gonna
cost you the twenty thirty one pick those other three players?
Are you doing that? I will say, I don't understand
with Bradley Bal. What is the appeal with Bradley Beal
when he has that no trade clause? Is it that
they would be getting picks back? That's it because you're
not giving up the twenty thirty one first, so you'd
be ducking the second apron and then in theory getting
picks while acquiring Bradley Beal.
Speaker 2: I don't see the Beal thing for them from any standpoint.
I think Levine I could, okay, I get it, that
makes some sense.
Speaker 1: Would you up your twenty thirty one pick for Lavine? Though?
Speaker 2: And Middleton's going out and that has to go out
in that too, right? I might if i'm because maybe
Middleton just is at a point where, even though his
number is lower, he's the Levine is just more valuable,
like dollar for production going forward, and you have to
be pretty significantly more valuable to justify the twenty thirty
one going out Lavine. I think of those guys as
the only one I do it for. I don't the
Butler fit is just like it's weird, and I just
I don't know. Maybe that's wrong. Maybe it should just
be Butler should be the guy that they should want.
Lavine makes the most, Lavine feels the safest. How about that?
Maybe it's just me being risk averse that that if
I had to get one of those three guys on
the roster for and it costs the twenty thirty one,
I think I feel best about Levine and I don't
love it.
Speaker 1: Do you like Levine is also? I guess in theory
you could game the Lavine deal differently to where okay,
Middleton still gone, but could you figure out a way,
like are you sending out enough contracts with Connaton and
Middleton to keep Bobby Portis who not great this year?
But like does feel because like, what are you doing
with backup? Bigger? You just say, well, no, that's honest.
Now we have the brook of the Yannis minutes, but
then we have like those two are just gonna be
staggered and solo.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it gets tough. Portois is too important to the
rotation is the problem? Like, and that's just what happens when.
Speaker 1: I think you probably could send out enough money if
it was Levine too, but you're not. The problem is
there though, You're not going to then duck the second apron.
So if you're aggregating, you need to duck the second apron.
That's the importance of moving the port It like, you
can't you need to shave six and a half million
dollars while matching, So you basically need to send out
like fifty one million bucks to get Levine while not
including Bobby Portis. That's like I think probably like five
or six rotation players at that much.
Speaker 2: Right, and now you're just expanding the deal to like
six teams because you can't just you can't be doing
four for ones all over the place. It gets real
comple I mean, anything they do if it's a multi
team thing is gonna be really complicated. But I but
hypothetically doable.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean I'm currently at five players, Chris Middleton,
Marjon Bochamp, delonn Wright aj Green just as a number placeholder,
and the Bucks would still be a second Apri team
after once. So that's it. That's where it gets. I
think I would do it, though I give up the
twenty thirty one first to get Butler and door Levine.
If you told me I was getting picks for Bradley
Beal and you're just resigned, I get, well, we'll ride
out his no trade clause. I don't know. I don't
think you could talk me into it. I don't. I
don't think I could do it.
Speaker 2: Man, Just like how many? Like? How many am I getting? Again?
How easily you know the.
Speaker 1: Picks that are in play? It's the three picks that
the Suns have.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but how many of those?
Speaker 1: Or you get like because is my Miami is not
gonna punt on getting any picks, so you're let's say
they get two of those.
Speaker 2: I mean, the logic would be the same as it
is for Phoenix, which is, at least now you have
multiple sweeteners. Your rating of their sweetness may vary because
they're going to be not great, but like, at least
you add the ability to do like more than one
thing flexibility wise, which is part of the appeal to Phoenix.
Even if they do just bundle all those up, Salery,
that's the thing. You add some flexibility. But you have
the same issue that the Suns do, where it's just like, no,
you have a.
Speaker 1: Worse issue because you're now sending out the last of
your mid end contracts to get.
Speaker 2: Well, that's right, that's right. So I guess I guess
My answer is I'm gonna need them all, all three
of those and those that's not on offer, So I
will I think if.
Speaker 1: You were getting all three, maybe I would. That warrants
a conversation. I just I don't know that I understand
the theory of Braddy Beal on this team, because I
know he can be a better player than we've seen
in Phoenix. But like Zach Levine makes more sense offensively
on a team that has Giannis and Dame than Bradley
Beal does. To me, unless you think that, I honestly
don't like, can you to us throw the picks out
of the equation. What is the what makes Bradley Beal
a better fit than Zach Lavine on this Bucks team?
Other than get ability? Is that what it is?
Speaker 2: No? Yeah, if you're just asking like you No, that
is it? I mean how gettable? Yeah, Levine is just
a better player at all the things that Beale is
good at, right, like at the zach Lyviane's more durable
that when's the last time we I mean, that's that's
that's a wild thing to contemplate.
Speaker 1: Maybe that if you really put the ball in Bradley
Beal's hands, he might be the better playmaker. But he's
making more money too, So like it really is, you know,
for Beal, at the very least, you're not giving up
your twenty thirty one first round pick, and if you're
getting Levine, I'm assuming that you are giving up Yeah.
Speaker 2: I guess that's the argu that would be the case
you'd make that that's the difference. Essentially.
Speaker 1: I still think of the two, we know what we prefer.
Would you prefer Butler or Levine for this team?
Speaker 2: I think it's Levine. Is that crazy?
Speaker 1: I don't think it's crazy because you're not sending out
anyone who's been mission critical to your defense this season,
and you've been better defensively, Like what does the defense
look like?
Speaker 2: It's bad?
Speaker 1: But you're you're really like you're banking on Torrean Prince
and Gary Trent Junior and like Andre Jackson and who
am I forgetting a j Green has had some like
but you're just really a lot of those guys there,
lifts that are already outsize relative to their roles get heavier.
I think Giannis's job, for what he does, too, gets
a lot more difficult did over Brook Lopez.
Speaker 2: I just I here's I don't know that Butler's that
great a defender anymore, like he.
Speaker 1: Would instantly become the best perimeter defender on Milwaukee.
Speaker 2: But well, that's that's more of a statement about the
Bucks than it is about him. I think also, like,
do you feel better about having Levine for the last
couple of years this dealer Butler? If you bring him
back at the Payriod, it's gonna take.
Speaker 1: I might, Yeah, I think I might prefer Levine too.
I think I might be a little bit higher on
Butler's defense. But even just the the off ball stuff
on offense, you're now asking probably a lot more of
Damian Lillard to be off the ball if you're getting Butler.
Or we've seen Butler used as the screener, but I
don't know how much of that he's doing in Milwaukee,
and then which gianness is appeal? If if Jimmy Butler is
the one setting screens.
Speaker 2: Is the fit's clunky? I mean, defensively, you can, I would,
I guess I would concede that Butler would help more
than Levine. That doesn't feel like a stretch. But offensively,
do you just give more back because you're super crunched now.
Speaker 1: Art like, who's the Yeah, I guess you're downgrading your
spacing with that deal, is what you're doing. Because in net,
like in net, Jimmy Butler is still the best offensive
player of anyone that's going, including Chris Middleton going out.
Speaker 2: Yeah that's true.
Speaker 1: Well yeah, but is he the better fit? Yeah, that's on.
I thought I was gonna default to Butler, but I
think I'd prefer them to get Levine safer.
Speaker 2: He's safer, he's cheaper. That's just that's gonna do it
for me?
Speaker 1: Would he? If you're retrading them though, Butler on his
next deal or Levine on his deal, let's just say
they're both two years left. Who's going to get you
more value?
Speaker 2: I mean, why is the answer? And he? I think
it might be Levine. I think because the cost is
going to be what it is for Butler, And it's
just like, I don't know, I am I are we
out on the being in the Jimmy Butler business? Is
that too? Is that too rash?
Speaker 1: But I think any team that's not Memphis right can be.
Speaker 2: That's the problem is Memphis was like, I make Memphis
makes sense?
Speaker 1: Do it?
Speaker 2: And he's like, Nope, not there.
Speaker 1: Well, what is did Memphis do something to Jimmy Butler?
Was that they held Andre Godala hostage at one point?
Is that? What is that?
Speaker 2: I even forgot about that whole saga. Uh, I don't know.
It doesn't make sense to me. He doesn't want to
live in Memphis that I guess. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm just find I'm finding a fact like Mark J.
Spears saying, I've heard any team but Memphis.
Speaker 2: Maybe maybe the Grizzlies make all their players stay in
the same hotels on the road, and he's just out
on that.
Speaker 1: Uh, that most likely player to be traded on the
Bucks Grant.
Speaker 2: I guess I'll just say content even though we just
talked about how tricky that is.
Speaker 1: Do you think that they'll be able to move him
if they can't strike a bigger deal, Like that's including
them aggregating, Like do you think that there's a team
with just that second that would say, hey, we'll take
pack content into our non taxpayer in the mid level
exception or something.
Speaker 2: That's I mean, the fact that he can fit into
the exception really helps. I'll I guess I'll say yes,
since I'm picking him. But that's another one I don't
feel super confident in.
Speaker 1: We didn't even really get into really quickly the players
we mentioned. Do you think any of them are I
guess Jimmy Butler comes closest to addressing their biggest need,
which feels like perimeter defense maybe, but I'm not even
sure that's Like, if you want athleticism, Levine would be
the way to go. You could say they need a backup,
big upgrade, and that's not going to be Levine or
Jimmy Butler.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, it's just we need a guy that
kind of does the Andre Jackson things but is more
of an offensive threat I suppose, which I guess Butler
sort of fits that beat than anyone because we've conceded
he is of the guys we've discussed the best defender,
but he's not like he's got the size. He's not
like an athletic wonder anymore by any stretch. But yeah,
that that type. It's been that for a while. That's
why Jay Crowder was a thing there. They just like
need someone to guard your combo forwards and your and
your two threes.
Speaker 1: I do wonder how much the interested beel Or Levine
is bored from what's happened with Chris Middleton and his health.
And then if just because of the way that Giannis
is on the ball, you don't have that conventional second
initiator type guy aside.
Speaker 2: From Dame Right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, our final team, grant we made it to the Miami, we.
Speaker 2: Should just say say Jimmy Butler's name like fifty times
and talk about him.
Speaker 1: But is he the most likely player to be traded?
Speaker 2: What if he wasn't Terry Rozier. So they're just two
and a half million under the second aprin two point
six if you want to be precise, that means they're
a point two above the first thirteen point six above
the Tacks. Their twenty five first is going to the
thunder with lottery protection if it it doesn't convey unprotected
in twenty six, So that is also something we've talked about,
like what's the right way to approach that their twenty
seven first goes to Charlotte with lotter protection, it becomes
unprotected if not conveyed in twenty twenty eight. So we've
got the Jimmy Butler saga. Obviously, their biggest need is
that to go away one way or the other, like
resolve it somehow. And then it's kind of like, I
think we've agreed that they're not interested in tanking or
I mean, there's for several reasons, they're not really in
position to do it. It doesn't seem to serve their interests,
so they're gonna want present talent back. They also seem
to not want long term salary back, which is gonna
make this whole thing tricky. But I mean, if you're
listening to us, surely you've heard more than you can
handle of the Butler saga. And really for them, like, yeah,
they're the newsiest team we're going to talk about, but
it's relatively uncomplicated, right. It's just they got to figure
out the best Butler deal and then decide like what
their priorities are. I think they've telegraphed some of that
in a return package, and where that positions them going forward,
by the way, being run by pat Riley, who's what
eighty pushing eighty, and so they're going to be short
term thinkers. So I don't know where you want to
start there.
Speaker 1: I think we need like the you can go back
and listen to like one of a dozen episodes probably
from us. Let's attack this from a different angle. He
is the most likely player to be traded.
Speaker 2: Correct in the league?
Speaker 1: Right, Well, that might go a little far. I think
New Orleans getting out of the trading someone to get
out of the tacks might be just pick a player
from there. What is we know that they're then going
to try to at least remain competitive post Jimmy Butler?
What is the archetype of player they need most when
you're looking at this team through the window of Jimmy
Butler is gone. We haven't talked about.
Speaker 2: That, No, we haven't. So that's why I'm pausing for
a second. I suppose, Well, I guess it depends on
what whether you think Tyler Hero is gonna be your
primary playmaker and ball handler, which.
Speaker 1: I think I think that you still probably answered the
question though, because he probably is at least no worse
than like a number two type guy there, h Terry Rozier.
You need the player, probably Terry Rozier. You thought Terry
Roziel was going to be for you, but with more
ball handling and maybe even more size. But I think
I think you hit it by saying maybe Tyler Hero
is that guy, but then you still need like the
guy to that guy.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I guess, Like I mean, it's it's too easy,
but you do you maybe just and everybody would want this,
I suppose, But do you do you just need someone
to occupy the Jimmy Butler spot in the team hierarchy,
you know, like the go to scorer that is gonna
guard I mean he doesn't again, he doesn't do this
as much as he used to, but is gonna be
the dude you throw at tough threes and fours and
twos in games that matter. Is it just we need
another star slash superstar or can you reorient this which
I think is maybe where it's going around Bam and
Hero and you're talking like role player guys type. Yeah,
yeah again back to the three and D wings. That's yeah,
I don't know.
Speaker 1: That's interesting. So we're gonna So if if you've decided
we're just gonna reorient around Tyler Hero Obam at a bio,
I still feel like, so maybe you're saying, I guess
the need would not come in the back court at
that point, is what you're saying. At least not if
you're going to go in the back court, it needs
to be like the lebron K Luca. These guys are
six seven.
Speaker 2: Six wing, Yeah, you'd be it'd be a backward player nominally,
but it would be a wing forward sized guy probably probably,
I'd say. And and again, if if Bam is your center,
then shooting needs to be I think a premium. Maybe
that lightens the playmaking burden. If you want to go
back to Bam being like a major facilitator, there's some
there's some flexibility there. I would ask you though, like,
as we're talking about this, how good are you if
if you are Hero and Bam centric with role players
around you, Like, I don't know how I feel about that.
If you're you can be competitive, but I don't know
if the heat are satisfied being competitive. I don't think
you're a contender level team unless you have just ace
role players around those two.
Speaker 1: Well, I think the easy thing to look at would
be because isn't that essentially what they are when Jimmy
Butler's off the court and.
Speaker 2: Minus all the distractions I spoke, I guess how do
you weigh that?
Speaker 1: Right? You would? But if you're because those minutes this
year they've not been good. They're minus three point eight
per one hundred when Bam and Tyler Herroll play without
Jimmy and they're in the thirteenth percentile of offensive efficiency.
Now what you could say is the remaining talent is
it yet optimized for that setup? I mean, Hayward high Smith,
Tarot's ear has been bad, you have high may Hawk
is like, it's not You're not far off from like
the theory of what the team would look like anyway,
it's can you get players who's played the same roles
as Hayward high Smith, but it's better r Hayward high Smith.
I was gonna ask you, like, would there be though
then knowing that, like any appeal to if you're sending
Jimmy like out, but and you can figure out a
way to get Beeal to agree, like bringing back zach
Lvine is my point as part of any Jimmy deal.
Is that something that would interest you or is that
too redundant? You think with hero.
Speaker 2: That hero fit is real tough. I think if you, well,
first of all, I would again, just as in Milwaukee,
I'd way rather have Levine than Beale. So that's I mean,
I don't feel like we need to even really highlight that.
I wouldn't foreclose it because at this point it's kind
of a beggars can't be choosers situation. You're very limited
in what you can do trading Butler. If you do
have a backward of Levine and hero Man, like you
really then you really need the better hey version of
Haywood high Smith out there with Bam and probably another
defense first guy, because that's just that's gonna be real tough.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And it's funny because I think we could maybe
even agree on the archetype, but I don't know, like
what is a realistic player that would Miami could maybe
not as even part of the Jimmy Butler deal. But
like I guess you're getting some first round picks, but
like then you're sending those out and rerouting them. It's
it's so complicated. But I ultimately think like there's a chance. No,
there's not a chance. I think if you're sending out
Jimmy Butler and your goals to remain competitive, you still
need a second best offensive player. And I mean that
in the sense of even if bam Adebayo is your
best all around player, there are limitations if you're running
offense through him. And unless there's just some theory of
this team conceptually, we have not seen yet where that
would change you like you need that. You might even
you could even argue they still need a best.
Speaker 2: Offensive That's where I was gonna like push back a
little bit. I think as much as Hero has improved,
I think if Tyler Hero is your best offensive player,
that team needs to have a lot of very specific
things elsewhere in the rotation to make you, I don't know,
to get you over like a forty three forty four
win kind of threshold. I think.
Speaker 1: I thought this is like somewhat related, But there's not
a team that would just you get Bradley Beal and
waves no trade, cause by acquiring him and then simply
just waving him, you're just eating the money for the
next two years. What would be the team on that timeline.
Speaker 2: That would be brazen enough to have fifty plus million
dollars with money on the you can won't even stretch him.
Speaker 1: But that would be so five years of beal on
the books. That's like twenty million dollar cap pits.
Speaker 2: Oh man, I don't think there is you will you
just have to like maybe it would be Danny Ainge, right,
would be the guy who would think, can you imagine
that there's already like when is Utah going to get serious?
If you did that, it's like, well, we're not starting
till twenty twenty eight. Basically, maybe Washington, well it'd have
to be the Washington's. I mean, Charlotte could Galaxy brain
it and be like, look how conservative and forward thinking
we are. Now, what do you think about that requests
to trade on the spot? If that, well, maybe that's
part of the plan.
Speaker 1: So I think our final thing here on the heat
if you are trading Jimmy Butler, there's a lot of
money to shave off, and I know you're trying to
be competitive. Are you trying to duck the tack? Though? Too?
Like I feel like the Pistons are going to be
involved in here somehow at any Jimmy Butler's trade.
Speaker 2: I think that's right because that thirteen six is I mean,
that's that's a lot of money. It's just you are, well,
you're giving up what's a just under fifty like forty
eight point eight. Yeah, if you take back Beal, I mean,
how do you duck the tax? If it's Beal that
comes back, if it's Levine that comes back, then you're
in business, right because that's a well not even that's
not even that big difference. Oh man, you.
Speaker 1: Could look at like like a Duncan Robinson or Terry
I don't know who wants Terry Rozier as the problem.
And then you're just dealing with all small salaries like
you could Josh Richardson who yeah and Kevin Love Like
would those be if you're taking back Levine and then
you're just giving but then we're dealing with roster spot issues.
It would be tough, and I guess the moral the
story would be. I doubt there's a there's a package
where they duck the tax and they haven't decided to
punt on this season to some extent.
Speaker 2: Yeah, which like, as far as this season goes, you
should be okay punting. It's I get it. If you
want to be in the mix next year, But.
Speaker 1: Well you aren't you worried about that unprotected pick to
Miami unless you think you could really recalibrate over the.
Speaker 2: Summercount I forgot about that. That's such a complicating factor.
How bad can you get without with without totally ruining it?
I man, where do we We're gonna make this go
too long? So I forget what we decided would be
ideal for the twenty five and twenty seven protected first that.
Speaker 1: They are, it's it's to convey it.
Speaker 2: This you want it because you don't want the exposure
of unprotected picks right right?
Speaker 1: Because so right now, I mean they are what do
they have there?
Speaker 2: God, they have to be out of the lottery. How
are they going to do this?
Speaker 1: They're in the lottery right now too, And I don't
know how much they were better? Yeah there, they could
probably out tank the Spurs and the Bulls and maybe
the Sixers, but like even the Sixers have five more
losses right now, I don't know.
Speaker 2: This is so fraught, Like they have to they have
to trade Jimmy Butler.
Speaker 1: They have to.
Speaker 2: They have to get better, so they keep the pick.
That's like, that's impossible.
Speaker 1: Do you think that there's I know we said that
he's the most likely player on this team to be traded.
Is there any just outcome where you think that he
finishes the season in Miami.
Speaker 2: This is one of my like new things that I love,
is just like, yeah, you're just gonna stay here and
you're gonna be at home, and we're gonna let that
money come off the books and we'll go forward without you.
If it comes off the books, Oh my god, can
you imagine? I mean, you would have to because he's
not getting that Well, it depends on so then but.
Speaker 1: The scenario you're out laying is so you get worse
because Jimmy Butler's at home, right, you don't convey the pick,
and that you still haven't disgruntled Jimmie Butler on your
books entering entering the summer, the.
Speaker 2: Boy this has gotten I didn't think this is getting bleak. Yeah,
I mean I'm a fan of like risking it with
guys like Brandon Ingram for example, just like yeah, we'll
sign in trade or whatever. But that's a different situation.
There's no there's no option. I don't know, man, I
just don't think there's any way that they can hit
all three of those goals that that we later.
Speaker 1: Here's what I'm rooting for, because I'm not really picking sides.
I don't think anyone comes off looking particularly good in
this situation. I hope and I believe he'll be traded.
Do if we had to predict he'll be traded, I
think so. Yeah. I hope it's not to Phoenix or Milwaukee.
I just want it to be somewhere random. Honestly, the
funniest outcome would be Memphis saying fuck it and trading
for him.
Speaker 2: Anyway, we're gonna Kauhi this thing. Yeah, it'scept half a
season instead of a full season.
Speaker 1: The problem is is that, like Jimmy Butler, is that
we although we did think Kawhi was the type, remember
people were like, oh, is he going to report to
Toronto at one point? Yeah?
Speaker 2: I mean I'd have a hard time believing anyone could
be more difficult than Jimmy's prepared to be right now.
Maybe maybe Harden, but yeah, also like he's how much
older than than Toronto kawhis butler right now? Is it
like eight years?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Six or seven or eight years? Yeah?
Speaker 2: Yeah, he'll get traded.
Speaker 1: I agree.
Speaker 2: It would be a lot more fun if it wasn't
Phoenix or Milwaukee. Just just throw a wild card out there.
Speaker 1: I won't predict that, but I predict you will get traded.
They won't duck the tacks. I predict that they're still
not going to convey the pick this year, though, no
matter what happens.
Speaker 2: I don't know how good I feel about that last part.
That's gonna be tough.
Speaker 1: You don't think you think that they're I'm saying they
won't convey the pick.
Speaker 2: Oh you know that I agree that I agree with,
which is a bad outcome. But yeah, I just don't
see how they get improve enough to hold on to it.
All right, we kept that super brief. How you feeling
grant want to take us out of here? I feel
like we I'm glad we saved the well. Who knows
what order you're going to be listening to this in,
but I'm glad we saved the potentially dangerous teams for last.
I think two hours plus is excellent for us to
do fifteen teams. I don't know what you're talking about.
Thanks everybody for listening, for watching. If you're checking this
out on YouTube, make sure you're leaving comments, Sure you're subscribe.
Hit that subscribe button, as they say. If wherever you're
getting your podcast, please rate, review and subscribe there leave
with some positive comments five stars, thumbs up the whole thing.
Tell your friends, Tell your enemies. Shouts to Franklin like Ken.
Apologies to Jared Allen