Unfortunately, I fear that keon might be attached as an asset to get us a 4.
No, I'm not advocating it. However, his and our situation (unless there is some part of CBA applicable here that I don't understand) makes such a transaction fairly plausible.
Say Perry finds it tough to move DDR by himself. For what he brings, I think his salary is very reasonable. In any case, we might assume that Scott tried, but failed.
However, during the season, when a team trying to take a leap needs a player like DDR who can score in half court, and gets to add Ellis, a young player with huge upside, they might be willing to give up significant assets to acquire him. Wonder if that was part of the reason for not picking his option and signing him to a long term deal this year, which would have been financially good for us, and provided him security as well.
For us, it might give us a proper 4 we seem to covet. It will allow Keegan to move to 3, improve the team size, and clear some logjam at the guard position.
Now, it's a poor way to clear the logjam at the guard position by trading away your best guard. However, if we want a major player at 4, we will need to give up something significant. Keon and Keegan are our two best young players. Keegan is untouchable due to his size. As good as Keon has been, his minutes, and by extension his effectiveness, will be limited by our roster.