Your team does not have to be involved in the tradeLazyTitanSmash wrote:Trade Deadline Passed:What could/should have been?
Now that the trade deadline has passed, what was at least one trade that could/should have been made because it would have benefited both teams? What were the benefits for both teams?
To be fair, if you kept Canfield, I'd still have pushed for Canfield for Diallo/Lucas.greepleairport wrote: Tue Jun 27, 2023 7:28 pm Ha, it's like gman consulted titan on this one. So let's go there.
Titan (as an intermediary for myself and cashcab (we're fambly, ok)) floated a Diallo / Warley deal, which I declined. I stand by that because trading a big for a big didn't make sense to me when I have a backlog of bigs, one of whom is playing SF. Plus, I would delve deeper into the tax - only my 2nd year in the tax, but still - and I do not believe my outcome would have changed dramatically. Let's say I make it to the finals and play the Lakers (barring injury). Diallo's 20'ish minutes of play are not going to change the series either direction, at least not much further than if I lean on Warley more heavily in that series or Gillam for their strengths off the bench. Diallo is strong in both areas but he is also a foul liability.
But, fair enough. Another criticism against my Warley move. I'll take it.
I did want to see Diallo moved, though, just not to the Bay. I wanted a Suns Luke Hancock for Diallo deal. Suns wanted Hancock to go for a win-now player, and I thought Diallo / Hancock was pretty even (if the salaries could be sorted out). Suns win now, Hawks win later. But again, the Hawks need a bit more activity on the trade market in general. Phil Smith and Kalin Lucas are very similar, and Hancock is not too dissimilar, but across all three the Hawks would definitely have ammo to plug some positional holes by moving one or two of them next season - after a recovery TC from Uncle Phil.
I should have countered for Lucas. Dammit. Dammit all to hell. Oh well.garbageman wrote: Tue Jun 27, 2023 8:19 pmTo be fair, if you kept Canfield, I'd still have pushed for Canfield for Diallo/Lucas.greepleairport wrote: Tue Jun 27, 2023 7:28 pm Ha, it's like gman consulted titan on this one. So let's go there.
Titan (as an intermediary for myself and cashcab (we're fambly, ok)) floated a Diallo / Warley deal, which I declined. I stand by that because trading a big for a big didn't make sense to me when I have a backlog of bigs, one of whom is playing SF. Plus, I would delve deeper into the tax - only my 2nd year in the tax, but still - and I do not believe my outcome would have changed dramatically. Let's say I make it to the finals and play the Lakers (barring injury). Diallo's 20'ish minutes of play are not going to change the series either direction, at least not much further than if I lean on Warley more heavily in that series or Gillam for their strengths off the bench. Diallo is strong in both areas but he is also a foul liability.
But, fair enough. Another criticism against my Warley move. I'll take it.
I did want to see Diallo moved, though, just not to the Bay. I wanted a Suns Luke Hancock for Diallo deal. Suns wanted Hancock to go for a win-now player, and I thought Diallo / Hancock was pretty even (if the salaries could be sorted out). Suns win now, Hawks win later. But again, the Hawks need a bit more activity on the trade market in general. Phil Smith and Kalin Lucas are very similar, and Hancock is not too dissimilar, but across all three the Hawks would definitely have ammo to plug some positional holes by moving one or two of them next season - after a recovery TC from Uncle Phil.
This might have been a really strong idea, but Doug and I weren't able to discuss this deal because Thomas Walker is freshly on his RFA contract, so he can't be traded until this coming off-season. Definitely the right type of thought process though.LazyTitanSmash wrote:Harold Schiff for Thomas Walker.
I'm absolute sure I should not be giving advice to the best GM in the game, our current commissioner and the clear front runner to winning a championship this year.
But here's my argument:
The upside for the Lakers: Thomas Walker isn't helping that much this season, and he is slightly overpaid for this season's contributions. The Lakers would add Schiff, last year's MVP and to 5 in the league. If they are worried at all about getting the title this year, this trade would have locked it down.
The downside for the Lakers: They lose their future big man.
The upside for the Pistons: Get a big to build around in the future.
The Pistons should move Schiff to the Lakers because he has the highest value for the Lakers. Every other team still needs to win games now and early in the playoffs, so the Schiff injury brings down his value. But the Lakers don't have to worry about the Schiff injury; it won't affect their standing or any first-round playoff games.
The downside for the Pistons: They throw in the towel on winning a championship this season.
Overall, keeping Walker hedges, the Lakers bet on winning a title this season. Chances are they win it and are a better team with Walker in the future, but if they somehow lose the title this year, they will be looking for missed opportunities, and I would argue this is the one that would have been missed.