Trade & FA 2024-25:

[F Gump]

Probably because in today's NBA, overpaying for the wrong guy could nuke your entire timeline. 

I mean the Mavs were nearly victims of this with the KP trade. 2 years ago everyone was worried Luka was out of here after they went all in on Kyrie and were void of any talent. It took 4 masterful trades and some luck to scrape out of that and even still the Mavs are close to an empty cupboard compared to other teams. 

Orlando has a lot of assets don't get me wrong, but just because they have that doesn't mean they should spend a portion of it on Simons. In a scenario where Simons doesn't work out, they're stuck paying that dude 20+ mil a year and are forced to carve out a role for him.

Of course there is a chance it works. But even if it does are you taking them over NYK/BOS/IND/MIL/PHI/CLE to make it out of the East?

I am not a fan of Simons.

But I don't think the assets in the cupboard (or lack thereof) matters at all IF you have the top level talent on the court. If you have a sucky team, then yes, definitely keep the cupboard as full as possible as you try to build up the talent base to where it can win big. But if you have a team that is one player away from being top tier and a threat to win a title over the next few years, AND YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED AND CAN GET THAT PLAYER, then you use whatever assets it takes.

If I'm ORL, that player looks more like Klay than Simons, by a sizable margin. Or probably any number of other players. But an up-and-coming team with some talent has a shelf life on the talent base, and the time is now if they are on the edge of being a real contender if they fill that hole.

To apply that to the Mavs, I believe the Mavs current "empty cupboard" is irrelevant, because they have amassed the talent to contend. Talent is what matters, not "cap room" and "future picks" (which are only a possible route to MAYBE getting talent some day.) If you have acquired the talent to truly contend, that was the point all along.

Also, the "empty cupboard" replenishes itself with new assets every year. You get 2 picks, and a whole buttload of money to spend. 

Also, when you stockpile too many assets, it can make them almost worthless because you only have 15 roster spaces and (just as vital) only 240 mpg to offer players. 

"Full cupboard" doesn't play games against "empty cupboard." It's talent you can put on the court now. As a case in point, when DAL played OKC in the playoffs, OKC won the cupboard game by a wide margin. But so what? And what if they used a pick or 2 (of which they have so many) for PJW at the deadline, instead of settling for the carcass of Hayward, or any other number of moves that would have made a diff?

[SleepingHero]

I am not a fan of Simons.

But I don't think the assets in the cupboard (or lack thereof) matters at all IF you have the top level talent on the court. If you have a sucky team, then yes, definitely keep the cupboard as full as possible as you try to build up the talent base to where it can win big. But if you have a team that is one player away from being top tier and a threat to win a title over the next few years, AND YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED AND CAN GET THAT PLAYER, then you use whatever assets it takes.

That IF you have in your first sentence is a pretty big IF. And vague as well. What is top talent? All-stars 1-5 like Boston? A well fitting supporting cast of players ala 2015 ATL who won 60 games or this current ORL squad? A superstar+star and solid role players like Dallas? How many teams are ever seriously in contention at a time? Six? Seven at most? Are the other 23 are just supposed to bide their time? Building a team is complicated and there is a lot of luck. Having a full cupboard ALWAYS matters since it gives you all the flexibility in navigating the NBA. Like OKC at the moment can go and grab literally any player (barring maybe 3) they want if they really wanted to. That kind of power is always important. 

Identifying the player that takes a top team (or a non-sucky team) over the edge is rarely consistent. I doubt ANY of us here thought the Gafford+Washington additions at the TDL made us finals bound. I mean heck you had a thread in January calling the season a wash! Conversely, remember when the Mavs traded for LaFrentz? He was hardly the guy that took the Mavs over the top (and was picked apart by SAC) and yet Cuban doubled down and gave him 70 mil in the offseason only to be traded a year later. 

Point is, it's easy to say "once teams identify the player needed, then it makes sense to empty the cupboard" as you're ignoring the very real risk that IF that player does not work out, your team is essentially screwed for YEARS. RE: Porzingis, Kristaps. That is why I'm saying ORL should not prioritize C-list players (like Simons) just because they MAY fit well and pay a premium to do so. 

If I'm ORL, that player looks more like Klay than Simons, by a sizable margin. Or probably any number of other players. But an up-and-coming team with some talent has a shelf life on the talent base, and the time is now if they are on the edge of being a real contender if they fill that hole.

To apply that to the Mavs, I believe the Mavs current "empty cupboard" is irrelevant, because they have amassed the talent to contend. Talent is what matters, not "cap room" and "future picks" (which are only a possible route to MAYBE getting talent some day.) If you have acquired the talent to truly contend, that was the point all along.

I agree that the Magic are more keen to add a guy like Klay than Simons. There were rumors dating back to December last season that ORL was interested should Klay become available. They targeted KCP this summer as well. But the "empty cupboard" comment was less admonishing the Mavs and more so a comment on the reality of punishment if you misstep acquiring talent. Once you spend your assets on the guy, you better make sure he's correct. As with this new CBA and just general price of talent, a misstep could end an era. And we saw the outcome of that given the Mavs had to basically tank 1 season to refuel their cupboard just enough (and have some extraordinary scouting/luck on their side). 

 

"Full cupboard" doesn't play games against "empty cupboard." It's talent you can put on the court now. As a case in point, when DAL played OKC in the playoffs, OKC won the cupboard game by a wide margin. But so what? And what if they used a pick or 2 (of which they have so many) for PJW at the deadline, instead of settling for the carcass of Hayward, or any other number of moves that would have made a diff?

Of course but who said I was saying otherwise? ORL as a team is almost complete as is and they have one of the deepest rotations in the league.

Suggs/Black/Joesph/
KCP/Anthony/Harris
Franz/Howard/Da Silva
Paolo/Isaac/Houstan
WCJ/Mo Wagner/Goga

That team is at least 10 deep. They shouldn't feel rushed to overpay (which is assumed what it'd be given that POR was demanding 2 FRP on top of young players for a guy like Jerami Grant) for a guy like Simons.

[F Gump]

1  " I don't think the assets in the cupboard (or lack thereof) matters at all IF you have the top level talent on the court."

That IF you have in your first sentence is a pretty big IF. And vague as well. What is top talent?

2   Having a full cupboard ALWAYS matters since it gives you all the flexibility in navigating the NBA. Like OKC at the moment can go and grab literally any player (barring maybe 3) they want if they really wanted to. That kind of power is always important. 

3  Identifying the player that takes a top team (or a non-sucky team) over the edge is rarely consistent. I doubt ANY of us here thought the Gafford+Washington additions at the TDL made us finals bound. I mean heck you had a thread in January calling the season a wash!

 
1 I agree it's a big if. That was the point I was making about Simons, from both directions (if you are sure, and if you are otherwise right there, then go for it). The difficulty in knowing where you are already, and what you need and whether you should pay it, is why the GMs get the big bucks.

2  I never said an empty cupboard is to be preferred, all things being equal. But - adding key talent to be on that top tier of legit contenders TRUMPS keeping a full cupboard. It's not a cupboard war -- you only win titles by having TALENT to do it. There is a time when making a move or two for the right talent to take you to that top level and perhaps win this year is far more valuable than hoarding your assets.

3 I definitely did not see any avenue to getting the player(s) needed to get that much better. But the GM saw the right pieces and at the right prices, and he didn't fret over what effect it had on the cupboard. Are you saying he should have kept the cupboard full for later? Should have been scared away because it could be the wrong move?

I stand by what I said, and think the Mavs executed it just right -- " if you have a team that is one player [or so] away from being top tier and a threat to win a title over the next few years,  AND YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED AND CAN GET THAT PLAYER, then you use whatever assets it takes." That's what the Mavs did, and I think it was definitely the right approach. You'd prefer they kept the cupboard full for later?

[Mavs2021]

Probably because in today's NBA, overpaying for the wrong guy could nuke your entire timeline. 

I mean the Mavs were nearly victims of this with the KP trade. 2 years ago everyone was worried Luka was out of here after they went all in on Kyrie and were void of any talent. It took 4 masterful trades and some luck to scrape out of that and even still the Mavs are close to an empty cupboard compared to other teams. 

Orlando has a lot of assets don't get me wrong, but just because they have that doesn't mean they should spend a portion of it on Simons. In a scenario where Simons doesn't work out, they're stuck paying that dude 20+ mil a year and are forced to carve out a role for him.

Of course there is a chance it works. But even if it does are you taking them over NYK/BOS/IND/MIL/PHI/CLE to make it out of the East?

Sure you can also do nothing. Unlike the Mavs, who only had Luka and literally no other young talent, the Magic have Banchero, Wagner, Suggs, WCJ, Isaac, Anthony and a bunch of young players like Black, Houstan Howard etc. they can package or develop further

I don´t know whether they´ll be better than any of these teams, but they´d definitely be a lot more competitive with a 25 PPG guard that is on their timeline.

Suggs/Anthony
Simons/KCP
Wagner/Black
Isaac/WCJ
Banchero/Wagner

is a scary starting five and an elite bench.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

Sure you can also do nothing. Unlike the Mavs, who only had Luka and literally no other young talent, the Magic have Banchero, Wagner, Suggs, WCJ, Isaac, Anthony and a bunch of young players like Black, Houstan Howard etc. they can package or develop further

I don´t know whether they´ll be better than any of these teams, but they´d definitely be a lot more competitive with a 25 PPG guard that is on their timeline.

Suggs/Anthony
Simons/KCP
Wagner/Black
Isaac/WCJ
Banchero/Wagner

is a scary starting five and an elite bench.

Orlando won't sneak up on anyone, that's for sure. They're on the comeup.

[Chicagojk]

Sure you can also do nothing. Unlike the Mavs, who only had Luka and literally no other young talent, the Magic have Banchero, Wagner, Suggs, WCJ, Isaac, Anthony and a bunch of young players like Black, Houstan Howard etc. they can package or develop further

I don´t know whether they´ll be better than any of these teams, but they´d definitely be a lot more competitive with a 25 PPG guard that is on their timeline.

Suggs/Anthony
Simons/KCP
Wagner/Black
Isaac/WCJ
Banchero/Wagner

is a scary starting five and an elite bench.

Simons has mostly played on poor teams but I think there is more there as well. He can really shoot.  I mean, he may be one of the top shooters in the league.   At least that is what I feel when I see him play.  His defense is supposedly bad to really bad, but Orlando has enough plus defenders where they could use an elite shooter.  If I was offered KCP or Simons, Simmons would be my choice without even giving it a second of thought.  The issue is cost though.   KCP was overpaid but they did not have to give up any assets.  What would be Portland's asking price?  If it was just a pick or two plus Anthony, that is a different story.  They are probably asking for a young player or two.   I don't think I would want to give up Anthony Black there.


Simons is going to be a hot name though.   There are some teams who would definately improve if he was on their team.   The issue is 25 and 26 top of the drafts are strong, so poor to average teams are going to be reluctant to give up those picks.   So that leaves the good teams.    I think Simons eventually is the odd man out there.   Scoot and Sharpe are just going to be more important to Portland.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

Currently is Simmons a combo guard, or strictly a SG?

[SleepingHero]

I stand by what I said, and think the Mavs executed it just right -- " if you have a team that is one player [or so] away from being top tier and a threat to win a title over the next few years,  AND YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED AND CAN GET THAT PLAYER, then you use whatever assets it takes." That's what the Mavs did, and I think it was definitely the right approach. You'd prefer they kept the cupboard full for later?

Well there are two prongs here.

I do not disagree at all with your approach of "if you have a team that is one player [or so] away from being top tier and a threat to win a title over the next few years,  AND YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED AND CAN GET THAT PLAYER, then you use whatever assets it takes." 

GM's can't/shouldn't be afraid of risks. Like Nico said when they made the Kyrie trade, he was more worried about the risk if he didn't do it. So I agree with this mindset, but now in this new CBA, I think the risk assessment for trades should kill ones we were previously okay with, given the punitive downsides of a mistake.


The KP trade for instance is one I think the Mavs would have never done in this new CBA (*if given the chance and ignoring the new trade rules). Allotting 35% of your cap to a guy who plays in 60% of his games and doesn't really work with Luka is an immovable albatross that definitely would have killed this team if it was made in 2024. Zach Lavine is a good example. 


I also recognize I am looking back on the KP trade with hindsight. At the time I loved the trade, loved the risk, and loved KP the player. I was still an ardent defender of him right before he was traded. But looking back, it was pretty clear it was an overpay of massive proportions and it set the team on the brink of blowing it up (coupled with the mismanagement of Brunson). I would have never made the trade knowing then what I know now. Though that type of hindsight is worthless because if Donnie was that worried about those risks he should've never made the trade in the first place.


So yes, your mindset is correct. But I also think trades now are going to be run through a much more stringent risk assessment filter now that will prevent many trades that GM's were once comfortable to accept under the old CBA.

[Chicagojk]

As expected Markkanen is expected to sign a long term extension after today to eliminate him being eligible for a trade at the deadline.

JUST IN: NBA All-Star Lauri Markkanen and the Utah Jazz are expected to agree to a massive long-term contract extension and sign Wednesday or later, making him untradeable for entire 2024-25, sources tell me,
@Tjonesonthenba
,
@anthonyVslater
.

[SleepingHero]

Shams Charania (@ShamsCharania)
JUST IN: NBA All-Star Lauri Markkanen and the Utah Jazz are expected to agree to a massive long-term contract extension and sign Wednesday or later, making him untradeable for entire 2024-25, sources tell me, @Tjonesonthenba, @anthonyVslater.

Details: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5683827...extension/

[SleepingHero]

NBACentral (@TheDunkCentral)
Warriors final offer for Lauri Markkanen:

Moses Moody, multiple first-round picks, pick swaps and second-rounders, per @ShamsCharania

Golden State refused to offer Brandin Podziemski

[SleepingHero]

NBACentral (@TheDunkCentral)
The Utah Jazz are a sleeper candidate for Brandon Ingram, and the Pelicans have been linked to Walker Kessler for over a year now, per @cclark_13

“The Jazz are a team NBA insiders have circled as being a potential Ingram suitor. The bigs on Utah’s roster include Walker Kessler, John Collins, Drew Eubanks and Kyle Filipowski. Kessler, who’s still on his rookie contract, offers rim protection, a quality Pelicans executive David Griffin has been seeking to add for more than a year.”

(Via http://bit.ly/4ch56zW)

[michaeltex]

I would have never made the trade knowing then what I know now. Though that type of hindsight is worthless because if Donnie was that worried about those risks he should've never made the trade in the first place.

IMO, Donnie got a stiffie thinking about paring, what was projected as, two perennial All NBA Euros and was willing to take a chance he might not have normally taken. 

I mean this was the same MBT that screwed up the Nash re-sign, lost control of the DAJ signing (and way overpaid for Matthews), gave Chandler Parsons a max contract and was caught at the dinner table when FA season blew up in the opening hours.

So with the instant brilliance of Luka, he went for the hero shot and signed a KP who had not even had a practice in over a year, then gave him a max extension before even seeing a workout.

Hindsight is indeed 20:20, but I've always felt like someone should have given the MBT a 3 Stooges slap before making the final call.

[Mavs2021]

NBACentral (@TheDunkCentral)
The Utah Jazz are a sleeper candidate for Brandon Ingram, and the Pelicans have been linked to Walker Kessler for over a year now, per @cclark_13

“The Jazz are a team NBA insiders have circled as being a potential Ingram suitor. The bigs on Utah’s roster include Walker Kessler, John Collins, Drew Eubanks and Kyle Filipowski. Kessler, who’s still on his rookie contract, offers rim protection, a quality Pelicans executive David Griffin has been seeking to add for more than a year.”

(Via http://bit.ly/4ch56zW)

Yes. Ingram for Kessler. How about Portland make a winning trade, too. Then all 15 teams can compete for the play-offs. On the bright side, if we finish 45-37 we might get the #1 in the lottery.

[F Gump]

NBACentral (@TheDunkCentral)
The Utah Jazz are a sleeper candidate for Brandon Ingram, and the Pelicans have been linked to Walker Kessler for over a year now, per @cclark_13

“The Jazz are a team NBA insiders have circled as being a potential Ingram suitor. The bigs on Utah’s roster include Walker Kessler, John Collins, Drew Eubanks and Kyle Filipowski. Kessler, who’s still on his rookie contract, offers rim protection, a quality Pelicans executive David Griffin has been seeking to add for more than a year.”

(Via http://bit.ly/4ch56zW)

I noted weeks ago that I look for NO to make a push to move off of Ingram, and others here have as well. 

The question imo is whether Utah really would see any value in having Ingram (which is something I am skeptical about, but could prove to be true). If so, then I can see NO doing this deal. 

But the particulars of such a swap would be interesting. This feels like the kind of idea that could go somewhere and fill some needs for both teams.

ECONOMICS. The salary match can almost work as a simple 1 for 1: UT has about 30M in open cap room, and the difference in salary is about 33M. So UT would have to add almost any salary alongside Kessler's to make work. 
....NO is about 3M over the tax line, and presumably determined to do something to reduce salary by 3-4M at least. This would certainly be designed to provide that solution, and easily do so.
....UT also has incentive to increase their payroll, as they are about 17M below the team minimum (they do have 3 open roster spots they can fill towards that end). The penalties for being below the minimum are harsh enough that no team will go there. The deadline to get up to that number is opening day.

In theory Ingram is the better player, but his 36M salary is a problem in current NBA economics, as is his expectation of a max deal next summer which would start at about 44M. UT is one of the few teams with payroll that could handle that, but would they want to?

Because of the ease of the salary match, there are lots of ways to tweak it. NO can take back more players within a VERY wide range, so who might they target in addition to Kessler -- or, does UT have a bad salary they would want to plop into the deal, as part of the price, such as Collins? Ingram for Kessler-Collins fits the basic cap math each team needs, as it lowers NO payroll by about 6.5M and raises UT closer to the minimum.

TEAM PERSPECTIVES. From the NO end of things, something like a Kessler-Clarkson package for Ingram would be a godsend for their roster -- but would Utah do that? And would UT look to extract more value in picks? We also have to consider NO's thinking, that they have aimed to "sell" the supposedly-valuable Ingram and reap a harvest, and are thinking of how they will get value back for him, rather than just essentially give him away or even "pay" to have UT take him.

From the UT end of things, there's the question of how they see their future. Do they see value in Ingram, where they would want to keep him, or would he be a place filler for a season who then walks or is a SNT candidate next summer? Do they want to be better this season or do they want to tank for Flagg? IOW is Ingram a player that truly will help them to their goals?

THE AINGE FACTOR. We know Ainge will drive a hard bargain. Sometimes that means nothing happens. Sometimes he gets a ridiculous return. How will that factor into this possibility?

But overall, the pieces make sense. It seems like this is a trade that should happen in some way. So when it happens (or doesn't), we should end up with a decent picture of how NBA negotiations and relative GM-ing play out. I'm watching with interest.

[RGP1981]

I like my proposal better than Ingram for Lauri.

Nets get: Zion
Pels get: Lauri, Kessler
Jazz get: corpse of Ben Simmons + 2025 picks and other FRP picks from Nets and Pels.

That should take the Nets out of the running for the #1 pick.

Murray, Herb/TM3, Ingram, Lauri, Kessler.... will probably be a more formidable and consistent team than anything the Pels can make with Zion.

It's the perfect chance for the Pels to move off Zion, unless Dave Griffin wants to sink with him.

[DanSchwartzgan]

 

ECONOMICS.  

....UT also has incentive to increase their payroll, as they are about 17M below the team minimum (they do have 3 open roster spots they can fill towards that end). The penalties for being below the minimum are harsh enough that no team will go there. The deadline to get up to that number is opening day.

I'm really interested to see what the numbers look like for Markkanen.  Not only what they give him for the renegotiate in 24/25, but what they do in the years of the extension.  I don't think he's a full max guy and we are starting to see guys who are not All-NBA top 10 or so give up some money compared to what they could have gotten.  This will be interesting to see when the numbers come out.

[Smitty]

I'm really interested to see what the numbers look like for Markkanen.  Not only what they give him for the renegotiate in 24/25, but what they do in the years of the extension.  I don't think he's a full max guy and we are starting to see guys who are not All-NBA top 10 or so give up some money compared to what they could have gotten.  This will be interesting to see when the numbers come out.

5 years $238M. $220M in new money.

[F Gump]

I'm really interested to see what the numbers look like for Markkanen.  Not only what they give him for the renegotiate in 24/25, but what they do in the years of the extension.  I don't think he's a full max guy and we are starting to see guys who are not All-NBA top 10 or so give up some money compared to what they could have gotten.  This will be interesting to see when the numbers come out.

If it's not a max, I bet it's close. Thats my guess.

He seems like UT version of Michael Finley, the first "star" in a dry spell of losing teams, playing at close to an all-star level. In Mavs case, they gave Finley full max with no hesitation.

And even though there's a new financial paradigm, UT has no payroll of any consequence. No other player about to be great and get big bucks.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/4076...-deal-jazz


Markkanen lands 5 yr / 238 deal.