Whew, as the draft gets closer I made the mistake of seeking out draft analysis podcasts. One pod’s reason for concern about Toppin was that he played a bit stiff and was 22. I looked up robotic 22 yr old PF’s and it turns out you should draft them first for best results.
It also looked like there Is no advantage to drafting younger in regards to years played in the league or likelihood of success when drafting in the top 3.
In fact it seems more experienced/already successful top 3 picks have more successful NBA careers unless LeBron. LeBron aside, more successful younger/less experienced players seem to come from the middle of the 1st Rd than the top.
Agreed. If he’s part of a deal for an elite player, sure.
But I think he can bring more to the Warriors on the court next season than he can as salary ballast. He’s also our starting SF wing at a shallow position. Trading him creates a new hole.
I like almost any trade down into the 3-8 range provided it brings an back extra (likely good) first round pick and doesn't bring on a lot of salary, but I don't think most of these deals are favorable enough for the other party. Put it this way, if the Warriors end up with Toppin or Haliburton with the 7th pick, assuming they aren't gone, *and* a good 2021 pick, what's not to like? These are guys that the Warriors supposedly like at #2, so they should like them even better at #7 with an extra pick. It's not like Edwards or Wiseman were likely to be great next year.
The only consistent draft noise I hear is that #1-8 (or #1-10 or #1-12) are very much in flux: is Avdija a #9 or a #2, is Wiseman a #1 or a #4, etc. If that's the case, then moving from #2 to #7 (or somewhere else in the top 10) doesn't seem to be that risky of a move. Then if teams start throwing in picks in next year's stacked draft and/or players that could be in our top 8 rotation this year, then these seem like such easy offers for the Warriors to grab. I've said before that if there's someone the W's love at #2, then they should only give that up for some serious talent. But if the top half of the draft is flat (like we keep hearing), then most of these moves make a lot of sense. Your (Apricot's) excellent Beat the Draft series on Wiseman has me a lot higher on him than I was before those articles. And rewatching video of him I see shades of David Robinson there (which leads me to wonder how important would The Admiral be in today's NBA?). But he also might be JaVale McGee, which is not a bad player (and seems like an awesome guy - not just because of the fanny pack), but definitely not worth keeping over some of these offers.
And then I reread your summary where you compare to both Robinson and McGee, and so maybe I'm not having great insight and I'm just plagiarizing what you said 2 months ago.
I think too many Warriors are at the stage of overvaluing Wiggins now... I think he's got untapped potential, and his value is at this point lower than it should be (i.e. it's a very bad contract, but not the worst in the league) but Jrue is obviously a better player than Wiggins and is cheaper. That said, Zach's own trade idea of Wiggins + 2 for Jrue + 13 is much more favourable and the 21 MIN seems like too much to give up in this case (and Reddick is good but not really the type of player we need most right now).
Wiggins makes more than Holiday so the trade works salary wise. Holiday is 30 but a chunky sturdy type that should hold up well for a few more years (Kyle Lowry was 33 last year and was engine behind Raptors championship team). Reddick only works if we throw in Looney, and overall I agree that's he's not worth it at this point.
First one is intriguing (Holliday and JJ), seems like the others are just the Warriors fleecing the other teams. What's next Looney, Poole, and a bag of peanuts for Beal?
It's interesting how Lowe is holding the #2 pick as more valuable than many Warriors fans are... I'm also noticing an overall weird trend of many Warriors fans seeming to overvalue Wiggins as a trade piece (he's a fine player but a very bad contract, so overall pretty negative asset) while undervaluing the #2, when it comes to trade ideas. Zach seems rather closer to the mark of where both the market value of both assets is actually at, given his neutral position and connection with actual FO staff. But if you'd asked me in January, I wouldn't have guessed that dubs fans would be too high on Wiggins and too low on the #2 pick. Sentiment is a funny thing.
Another factor here might be positional depth -- I love Jrue, and while he can probably play some minutes at the 3, we would be getting even smaller while the lakers will be staying the same size.
If Wiggins is about as bad on the Dubs as he was on the T-Wolves, then we're going to have a hard time moving his contract, just like Minnesota did. And if the reclamation project works, we're not going to want to trade him. So, I think the only way we trade Wiggins is for a different max contract and packaged with the MIN 2021 pick we got alongside him.
That said, 5.1 is extremely tempting because I really like Jrue Holiday and I think he'd be amazing in the Warriors starting 5. JJ Redick is a nice positive, too. For the next couple years at least they're almost certainly better than whoever those picks end up being. I break down this trade into three parts:
1. Jrue is solid on offense and defense, but he's only 6'3". So is JJ. If they do this trade, do the Warriors just run a three-guard lineup as their regular rotation? Sounds like it would be fun to watch but maybe a bit rough in some matchups, especially vs. LAL.
2. How good will Wiggins really be on GSW? It seems like he has all the tools to be a borderline star, but it's seemed like that in Minnesota for a long time and he's only disappointed. Right now he's in kind of this weird "not too good but could be much worse" zone that includes a bunch of guys on anywhere from vet min to max contracts. In fact, shockingly comparable to Harrison Barnes. My best guess is he upgrades to an "above average rotation player" level, which is still not what you want to spend a max contract on, but for the next couple seasons the only difference that makes is Lacob is shelling out a few more bucks in luxury tax, right?
3. Is giving up two high picks sacrificing too much of the future Warriors to win now? Obviously the picks are what makes this trade appealing to NOP, who's looking to build a core in the same age range as Zion, but it means that two or three years from now when Steph, Klay, Dray, and Jrue are really showing their age, the Warriors will likely be scrounging for promising upstarts to continue the dynasty. (🤞 some of youngsters they have now like 'Quese, Paschall, and yes, Looney—hard to remember how young he is—are reaching their peaks by then.)
Overall I think I turn down this trade, much as I'd love to have Jrue and JJ. I don't think the current Warriors should be desperate enough to take "win-now" upgrades at the cost of their future, especially when the positional fit is a bit awkward even though the players themselves are very good.
I mostly agree; primarily because, although Holiday is probably a better player than Wiggins, we need Wiggins’ size defending bigger wings. I am hopeful Wiggins surprises. When you consider who he has played with the past few years, and what was asked of him, I think it’s a reasonable hope. Holiday would be a ton of fun to watch but if he takes the place of Iguodala in the new death lineup, we cant hold the middle. But if we can get Holiday for the 2nd (using the TPE in some kind of third party flip, and possibly adding Poole) without giving up Wiggins, I’m down.
I don’t really share your concern about the future. Unless there is a sure-fire star that requires maturation (maybe next year but not this year) I’m looking entirely to maximize talent the next 3-4 years. We shouldn’t lose site of how special is our big three. The next years are about cementing their legacy. So, I’m more than willing to deal draft picks for the right teammates.
Some of these trades being discussed (love what Apricot is doing btw) are better if we can imagine another complementary deal afterward. I would love Holiday more if I knew we didn’t need to use the 2nd pick to obtain more size. If that pick can get us A Gordon, then I don’t want to spend it on Holiday. But if Gallinari falls into our lap for nothing, for example, then the 2nd pick and change for Holiday works great.
What do you guys think of trading back with Charlotte to grab Zeller + 3rd overall? I'm a big fan of Zeller as a player and it would fill a need while allowing us flexibility at 3rd.
Dang, I just replied to this in yesterday's thread. tl;dr Zeller is not that good and I'd rather have Wiseman or just sign an equally-good center for the vet minimum.
These are tepid compared to the previous iterations. The only problem is that these trades don’t seem to move the needle as much, while some move out of the top tier of picks to add what looks like a depth piece. That’s not great when your just filling in depth, no matter how much it’s needed.
What do you mean by tepid? I actually like this bunch of trades a lot, esp. the DET/CHI ones, which add a pretty cheap young piece in an area need, and still enable us to use MLE and TPE to add other help. Jrue trade is an overpay, but he's a needle mover (you get off Wiggins contract, fill your perimeter defence and playmaking needs, and can still add another wing like Oubre/Roco via TPE). Sac trade makes less sense to me as is... a lot of salary for Bjelica + Holmes (and we only need one more big), so it's probably better for us to just ask for Holmes only and increase draft asset return (less pick protection, and/or add another first).
Agreed. This draft has a lot of good-not-great candidates but somewhere between 5 and 10 is where the lower tier starts and those players are a lot less likely to become stars. I'd rather see the Dubs take a chance on a top-5ish pick than dip further down while picking up depth now. I think the team has plenty of other options for picking up depth but precious few for picking up future stars to continue the dynasty past the current core.
Trading down while adding 2021 picks is a different story, though, which is why the DET trade is worth considering.
The Detroit trade that has 7, Svi, Kennard, and a top pick next year would be great. Kennard is a nice all around offensive guard, and Svi is a legit great shooting prospect at 22.
Wendell Carter has been saying he does not want to play C. Maybe that's just an effort to get him out of Chicago. He's clearly a C. But that would be phenomenal.
The other ones aren't bad. I'm really intrigued by any trade that lands the Warriors a potential lottery pick next year.
Regarding the Detroit trade: two solid-performing NBA rotation players (with upside) on rookie contracts seems like a haul for giving up a few positions in a draft. Even if one of said young players might have old man knees already.
It seems like an awful lot of Detroit to give up with the pick for next year. A team in Detroit's position really should not be trading away future picks either.
I actually like this trade better for both teams if you take out Kennard and just do it with Svi and the future pick. Svi is cheaper (and won't have to eat into TPE to take him) and probably a better shooter projecting forward. Historically, it costs a lightly protected future first jus tot move up 1-2 spots at top of draft, so Svi (a young second rounder who's promising but nowhere near star level yet) + future first pick is probably fair value to move from 7 to 2, given the weaker draft.
Whew, as the draft gets closer I made the mistake of seeking out draft analysis podcasts. One pod’s reason for concern about Toppin was that he played a bit stiff and was 22. I looked up robotic 22 yr old PF’s and it turns out you should draft them first for best results.
It also looked like there Is no advantage to drafting younger in regards to years played in the league or likelihood of success when drafting in the top 3.
In fact it seems more experienced/already successful top 3 picks have more successful NBA careers unless LeBron. LeBron aside, more successful younger/less experienced players seem to come from the middle of the 1st Rd than the top.
Stop giving away Wiggins. I want to see him develop with the Dubs. Don't trade for anyone over 30.
Agreed. If he’s part of a deal for an elite player, sure.
But I think he can bring more to the Warriors on the court next season than he can as salary ballast. He’s also our starting SF wing at a shallow position. Trading him creates a new hole.
What is the current SF rotation? Wiggins and Juan?
I like almost any trade down into the 3-8 range provided it brings an back extra (likely good) first round pick and doesn't bring on a lot of salary, but I don't think most of these deals are favorable enough for the other party. Put it this way, if the Warriors end up with Toppin or Haliburton with the 7th pick, assuming they aren't gone, *and* a good 2021 pick, what's not to like? These are guys that the Warriors supposedly like at #2, so they should like them even better at #7 with an extra pick. It's not like Edwards or Wiseman were likely to be great next year.
The only consistent draft noise I hear is that #1-8 (or #1-10 or #1-12) are very much in flux: is Avdija a #9 or a #2, is Wiseman a #1 or a #4, etc. If that's the case, then moving from #2 to #7 (or somewhere else in the top 10) doesn't seem to be that risky of a move. Then if teams start throwing in picks in next year's stacked draft and/or players that could be in our top 8 rotation this year, then these seem like such easy offers for the Warriors to grab. I've said before that if there's someone the W's love at #2, then they should only give that up for some serious talent. But if the top half of the draft is flat (like we keep hearing), then most of these moves make a lot of sense. Your (Apricot's) excellent Beat the Draft series on Wiseman has me a lot higher on him than I was before those articles. And rewatching video of him I see shades of David Robinson there (which leads me to wonder how important would The Admiral be in today's NBA?). But he also might be JaVale McGee, which is not a bad player (and seems like an awesome guy - not just because of the fanny pack), but definitely not worth keeping over some of these offers.
And then I reread your summary where you compare to both Robinson and McGee, and so maybe I'm not having great insight and I'm just plagiarizing what you said 2 months ago.
Also, for everyone that shat on my "#2 for detroit #7 + 21 first" idea that Eric put into the last round by asking (reasonably) why the hell detroit would want to move up.... https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/30263021/detroit-pistons-intrigued-lamelo-ball-moving-draft
I think too many Warriors are at the stage of overvaluing Wiggins now... I think he's got untapped potential, and his value is at this point lower than it should be (i.e. it's a very bad contract, but not the worst in the league) but Jrue is obviously a better player than Wiggins and is cheaper. That said, Zach's own trade idea of Wiggins + 2 for Jrue + 13 is much more favourable and the 21 MIN seems like too much to give up in this case (and Reddick is good but not really the type of player we need most right now).
I like Holiday and Riddick, but they are both over 30 and I don't see how you make the salaries work out since they are owed 40m combined next year.
Wiggins makes more than Holiday so the trade works salary wise. Holiday is 30 but a chunky sturdy type that should hold up well for a few more years (Kyle Lowry was 33 last year and was engine behind Raptors championship team). Reddick only works if we throw in Looney, and overall I agree that's he's not worth it at this point.
Just a note -- if we were to draft a player of their choosing we could use their rookie scale salary for matching.
First one is intriguing (Holliday and JJ), seems like the others are just the Warriors fleecing the other teams. What's next Looney, Poole, and a bag of peanuts for Beal?
Lowe thinks most of the trades are GSW selling low btw
It's interesting how Lowe is holding the #2 pick as more valuable than many Warriors fans are... I'm also noticing an overall weird trend of many Warriors fans seeming to overvalue Wiggins as a trade piece (he's a fine player but a very bad contract, so overall pretty negative asset) while undervaluing the #2, when it comes to trade ideas. Zach seems rather closer to the mark of where both the market value of both assets is actually at, given his neutral position and connection with actual FO staff. But if you'd asked me in January, I wouldn't have guessed that dubs fans would be too high on Wiggins and too low on the #2 pick. Sentiment is a funny thing.
Another factor here might be positional depth -- I love Jrue, and while he can probably play some minutes at the 3, we would be getting even smaller while the lakers will be staying the same size.
If Wiggins is about as bad on the Dubs as he was on the T-Wolves, then we're going to have a hard time moving his contract, just like Minnesota did. And if the reclamation project works, we're not going to want to trade him. So, I think the only way we trade Wiggins is for a different max contract and packaged with the MIN 2021 pick we got alongside him.
In general, I’m not willing to move Wiggins for anyone other than a star his size or larger.
I'm inclined to agree.
That said, 5.1 is extremely tempting because I really like Jrue Holiday and I think he'd be amazing in the Warriors starting 5. JJ Redick is a nice positive, too. For the next couple years at least they're almost certainly better than whoever those picks end up being. I break down this trade into three parts:
1. Jrue is solid on offense and defense, but he's only 6'3". So is JJ. If they do this trade, do the Warriors just run a three-guard lineup as their regular rotation? Sounds like it would be fun to watch but maybe a bit rough in some matchups, especially vs. LAL.
2. How good will Wiggins really be on GSW? It seems like he has all the tools to be a borderline star, but it's seemed like that in Minnesota for a long time and he's only disappointed. Right now he's in kind of this weird "not too good but could be much worse" zone that includes a bunch of guys on anywhere from vet min to max contracts. In fact, shockingly comparable to Harrison Barnes. My best guess is he upgrades to an "above average rotation player" level, which is still not what you want to spend a max contract on, but for the next couple seasons the only difference that makes is Lacob is shelling out a few more bucks in luxury tax, right?
3. Is giving up two high picks sacrificing too much of the future Warriors to win now? Obviously the picks are what makes this trade appealing to NOP, who's looking to build a core in the same age range as Zion, but it means that two or three years from now when Steph, Klay, Dray, and Jrue are really showing their age, the Warriors will likely be scrounging for promising upstarts to continue the dynasty. (🤞 some of youngsters they have now like 'Quese, Paschall, and yes, Looney—hard to remember how young he is—are reaching their peaks by then.)
Overall I think I turn down this trade, much as I'd love to have Jrue and JJ. I don't think the current Warriors should be desperate enough to take "win-now" upgrades at the cost of their future, especially when the positional fit is a bit awkward even though the players themselves are very good.
I mostly agree; primarily because, although Holiday is probably a better player than Wiggins, we need Wiggins’ size defending bigger wings. I am hopeful Wiggins surprises. When you consider who he has played with the past few years, and what was asked of him, I think it’s a reasonable hope. Holiday would be a ton of fun to watch but if he takes the place of Iguodala in the new death lineup, we cant hold the middle. But if we can get Holiday for the 2nd (using the TPE in some kind of third party flip, and possibly adding Poole) without giving up Wiggins, I’m down.
I don’t really share your concern about the future. Unless there is a sure-fire star that requires maturation (maybe next year but not this year) I’m looking entirely to maximize talent the next 3-4 years. We shouldn’t lose site of how special is our big three. The next years are about cementing their legacy. So, I’m more than willing to deal draft picks for the right teammates.
Some of these trades being discussed (love what Apricot is doing btw) are better if we can imagine another complementary deal afterward. I would love Holiday more if I knew we didn’t need to use the 2nd pick to obtain more size. If that pick can get us A Gordon, then I don’t want to spend it on Holiday. But if Gallinari falls into our lap for nothing, for example, then the 2nd pick and change for Holiday works great.
What do you guys think of trading back with Charlotte to grab Zeller + 3rd overall? I'm a big fan of Zeller as a player and it would fill a need while allowing us flexibility at 3rd.
Dang, I just replied to this in yesterday's thread. tl;dr Zeller is not that good and I'd rather have Wiseman or just sign an equally-good center for the vet minimum.
These are tepid compared to the previous iterations. The only problem is that these trades don’t seem to move the needle as much, while some move out of the top tier of picks to add what looks like a depth piece. That’s not great when your just filling in depth, no matter how much it’s needed.
What do you mean by tepid? I actually like this bunch of trades a lot, esp. the DET/CHI ones, which add a pretty cheap young piece in an area need, and still enable us to use MLE and TPE to add other help. Jrue trade is an overpay, but he's a needle mover (you get off Wiggins contract, fill your perimeter defence and playmaking needs, and can still add another wing like Oubre/Roco via TPE). Sac trade makes less sense to me as is... a lot of salary for Bjelica + Holmes (and we only need one more big), so it's probably better for us to just ask for Holmes only and increase draft asset return (less pick protection, and/or add another first).
Agreed. This draft has a lot of good-not-great candidates but somewhere between 5 and 10 is where the lower tier starts and those players are a lot less likely to become stars. I'd rather see the Dubs take a chance on a top-5ish pick than dip further down while picking up depth now. I think the team has plenty of other options for picking up depth but precious few for picking up future stars to continue the dynasty past the current core.
Trading down while adding 2021 picks is a different story, though, which is why the DET trade is worth considering.
The Detroit trade that has 7, Svi, Kennard, and a top pick next year would be great. Kennard is a nice all around offensive guard, and Svi is a legit great shooting prospect at 22.
Wendell Carter has been saying he does not want to play C. Maybe that's just an effort to get him out of Chicago. He's clearly a C. But that would be phenomenal.
The other ones aren't bad. I'm really intrigued by any trade that lands the Warriors a potential lottery pick next year.
Regarding the Detroit trade: two solid-performing NBA rotation players (with upside) on rookie contracts seems like a haul for giving up a few positions in a draft. Even if one of said young players might have old man knees already.
It seems like an awful lot of Detroit to give up with the pick for next year. A team in Detroit's position really should not be trading away future picks either.
Agreed.
Yeah DET prob says no, but I like that trade for GSW
I actually like this trade better for both teams if you take out Kennard and just do it with Svi and the future pick. Svi is cheaper (and won't have to eat into TPE to take him) and probably a better shooter projecting forward. Historically, it costs a lightly protected future first jus tot move up 1-2 spots at top of draft, so Svi (a young second rounder who's promising but nowhere near star level yet) + future first pick is probably fair value to move from 7 to 2, given the weaker draft.
Bjelica would be great with the Dubs. I also like Holmes. Now if this year's Sacramento pick was higher...