Does Lauri Get Traded?

[NUMBERICA]

If the 30 pick as any possibility of conveying to WAS, GSW cannot trade 29 and 31 outright. Those must be swaps.

That's what I'm assuming would be the case.

So your point is to get GSW's pick back to them and then we can ask for 4 firsts? I think I prefer owning their draft biased toward super swaps (3 super swaps, 3 picks, 1 swap) since I think that's possible, whereas I don't think they'd consider sending 4 picks and 3 swaps.

My objective in trading a premium asset is maxing the possibility of netting a premium pick by casting the widest, most gapless net.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Is Steph going to be playing in 2031?

I think it's only reasonable to ask a team to trade picks that you will still be playing.

He's won 4 rings for them. FOUR

 

[KqWIN]

That's what I'm assuming would be the case.

So your point is to get GSW's pick back to them and then we can ask for 4 firsts? I think I prefer owning their draft biased toward super swaps (3 super swaps, 3 picks, 1 swap) since I think that's possible, whereas I don't think they'd consider sending 4 picks and 3 swaps.

My objective in trading a premium asset is maxing the possibility of netting a premium pick by casting the widest, most gapless net.

Yes we need GSW to own 30 so they can trade 29+31. It is significantly better than having swaps of 29+31.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Yes we need GSW to own 30 so they can trade 29+31. It is significantly better than having swaps of 29+31.

Significantly enough that GSW just won't deal, probably.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

That's what I'm assuming would be the case.

So your point is to get GSW's pick back to them and then we can ask for 4 firsts? I think I prefer owning their draft biased toward super swaps (3 super swaps, 3 picks, 1 swap) since I think that's possible, whereas I don't think they'd consider sending 4 picks and 3 swaps.

My objective in trading a premium asset is maxing the possibility of netting a premium pick by casting the widest, most gapless net.

If we didn't have so many picks I'd go for more volume, but since we can do the super swaps with other picks we own there is a lot more value in 25/27/29 than with a normal swap imo. You increase the quality and you already kinda had a "volume" problem. You take all the upside of their draft for 7 years... If Steph or Lauri gets hurt you can feed your future.

 

[NUMBERICA]

If we didn't have so many picks I'd go for more volume, but since we can do the super swaps with other picks we own there is a lot more value in 25/27/29 than with a normal swap imo. You increase the quality and you already kinda had a "volume" problem. You take all the upside of their draft for 7 years... If Steph or Lauri gets hurt you can feed your future.

Exactly.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

He's won 4 rings for them. FOUR

I get your point, but GSW has also been paying huge luxury tax bills to try and keep the team together and competitive.

I just don't think it's a reasonable ask to mortgage the teams future. If Steph doesn't like it and wants to go win more rings, then they should do everything they can to get him in a place he can try and do that.

I think teams and players should be having honest conversations with each other.

 

[KqWIN]

Significantly enough that GSW just won't deal, probably.

I don't even know what you mean by this, I'll just say is absolutely in UTA's best interest to get WAS to play ball. You can either get WAS to play ball and all they would need is a pick that's better than top 20 protected. The alternative is that you lose two picks in 29+31. Whether you want volume or quality, it is not debatable that getting WAS to play ball yields a significantly better prize.

 

[Elizah Huge]

I get your point, but GSW has also been paying huge luxury tax bills to try and keep the team together and competitive.

I just don't think it's a reasonable ask to mortgage the teams future. If Steph doesn't like it and wants to go win more rings, then they should do everything they can to get him in a place he can try and do that.

I think teams and players should be having honest conversations with each other.

You do whatever you can to maximize these last years of Steph.

 

[NUMBERICA]

I don't even know what you mean by this

I mean they won't trade 4 unprotected picks and 3 swaps to the Jazz (but they might be able to talk themselves into 3 super swaps, 3 picks, and 1 swap).

I'm doing this to get every chance (even if mostly snowball's chances in hell) at the top of the lottery for seven years straight.

 

[Elizah Huge]

I don't even know what you mean by this, I'll just say is absolutely in UTA's best interest to get WAS to play ball. You can either get WAS to play ball and all they would need is a pick that's better than top 20 protected. The alternative is that you lose two picks in 29+31. Whether you want volume or quality, it is not debatable that getting WAS to play ball yields a significantly better prize.

He’s saying that Golden State might not even be willing to deal 4 unprotected firsts and 3 pick swaps.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

You do whatever you can to maximize these last years of Steph.

I disagree, and the whole point is what I would do if I was running the team.

 

[Elizah Huge]

It’s a lot easier to swallow trading 3 picks and 4 pick swaps vs 4 picks and 3 swaps.

 

[Elizah Huge]

I disagree, and the whole point is what I would do if I was running the team.

It’s easy for you to say that but Steph is their entire franchise. He won them four championships. They owe it to him.

 

[KqWIN]

He’s saying that Golden State might not even be willing to deal 4 unprotected firsts and 3 pick swaps.

Oh for sure, and thank you for clarifying. I could not decipher all these vague one liners. But the point is the same. The prize from GSW would be 29 and 31. You can only get that by getting WAS to play ball. We need WAS to play ball. If WAS does not play ball, GSW do not have a trade package for use.

 

[NUMBERICA]

It’s easy for you to say that but Steph is their entire franchise. He won them four championships. They owe it to him.

And they have a real chance for more over the next 2-3 years. And championships are eternal (theoretically).

 

[Elizah Huge]

And they have a real chance for more over the next 2-3 years. And championships are eternal (theoretically).

I’d mortgage our entire draft for the next 20 years if it meant getting one ring.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

It’s a lot easier to swallow trading 3 picks and 4 pick swaps vs 4 picks and 3 swaps.

I don't think its that much different if the odd years are super swaps. I think its hard to pay a price to unlock a pick to then give it all to another team but from our perspective would you rather have swaps in 26/28/30 with our own picks or swaps in 25/27/29 with our pick/cleveland/Minny and a swap in 31 with our own pick. The 2030 pick they owe doesn't mean a whole lot to me... I mean if we can unlock it for cheap and get it clean then great. I still want to get their picks in the even years with swaps in the odd years as we can get more use out of them and aren't stacking more picks in drafts we already have 2-4 picks.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

It’s easy for you to say that but Steph is their entire franchise. He won them four championships. They owe it to him.

That's true, I'm not necessarily considering the pressure that they are likely under. I don't think that would be an easy decision.

I still don't think they owe him EVERYTHING.

 

[Elizah Huge]

Oh for sure, and thank you for clarifying. I could not decipher all these vague one liners. But the point is the same. The prize from GSW would be 29 and 31. You can only get that by getting WAS to play ball. We need WAS to play ball. If WAS does not play ball, GSW do not have a trade package for use.

Of course that package is better that’s not even a question but I think it just depends if that package is a dealbreaker vs what could currently be on the table.

Washington playing ball shouldn’t even be that hard honestly. Just offer them the worst of our 4 2025 firsts to get that pick back. Hell, a couple seconds might even do it.