[NBA] Trade Deadline Season 2026 Open Thread

The_Jamal said:
Man. I love Domas, but a big expiring, the NOP pick and a wing prospect (albeit very disappointing). Don't think you could say no to that.
Click to expand...
Seems a bit light to me (would need at least another high pick in my view), but I also don't follow these trade values very closely. I don't think we need to be giving away a double-double/triple double machine and rebound/screen-setting leader solely for a disappointing player, salary relief, and one pick.
 
Warhawk said:
Seems a bit light to me (would need at least another high pick in my view), but I also don't follow these trade values very closely. I don't think we need to be giving away a double-double/triple double machine and rebound/screen-setting leader solely for a disappointing player, salary relief, and one pick.
Click to expand...
Usually I’d agree but given how good that Pels pick is probably going to be and the strength of this years draft, I’d do it.

Coming out of the draft with a potential combo of
AJ/Flemings or Peterson/Wilson potential means you’ve got the hard part of a rebuild done in a single offseason.
 
Warhawk said:
Seems a bit light to me (would need at least another high pick in my view), but I also don't follow these trade values very closely. I don't think we need to be giving away a double-double/triple double machine and rebound/screen-setting leader solely for a disappointing player, salary relief, and one pick.
Click to expand...

To be fair, that one pick has a great chance of being top 5 in this class. And we've talked about how valuable it would be to have clean books to take on more salary for draft capital in future deals. Such is the life of a rebuild. I also think Risacher is probably going to end up being a decent player that just never should have be a #1 overall pick.

"True value" it's a little under what Domas is actually worth, but this would be the kind of trade to really jumpstart the rebuild correctly and give us a leg-up. Another dart-throw at a AJ/Peterson/Booz/Wilson/Flemmings is honestly worth multiple other FRP from a contender that won't touch the lottery
 
Tetsujin said:
Usually I’d agree but given how good that Pels pick is probably going to be and the strength of this years draft, I’d do it.

Coming out of the draft with a potential combo of
AJ/Flemings or Peterson/Wilson potential means you’ve got the hard part of a rebuild done in a single offseason.
Click to expand...
As someone who explicitly does not want to trade Domas, the Pels pick and a flyer on Risacher is almost tempting. I assume most here would jump at it.
 
Tetsujin said:
Usually I’d agree but given how good that Pels pick is probably going to be and the strength of this years draft, I’d do it.

Coming out of the draft with a potential combo of
AJ/Flemings or Peterson/Wilson potential means you’ve got the hard part of a rebuild done in a single offseason.
Click to expand...
The_Jamal said:
To be fair, that one pick has a great chance of being top 5 in this class. And we've talked about how valuable it would be to have clean books to take on more salary for draft capital in future deals. Such is the life of a rebuild. I also think Risacher is probably going to end up being a decent player that just never should have be a #1 overall pick.

"True value" it's a little under what Domas is actually worth, but this would be the kind of trade to really jumpstart the rebuild correctly and give us a leg-up. Another dart-throw at a AJ/Peterson/Booz/Wilson/Flemmings is honestly worth multiple other FRP from a contender that won't touch the lottery
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know, but draft picks are ALWAYS a gamble to me. Even former "high" picks in "strong" drafts fail all the time. I always give the nudge to a known commodity than a hypothetical pick. I'd rather have Domas than a Bennett, or Oden, or MKG, etc., for instance. Without knowing where that pick may land, I'd push for more, even a protected future pick or a couple seconds. That's just me. 🤷‍♂️ I have little faith that high picks will ever end up being All Stars, with very few exceptions. We always put such picks on a pedestal and they often bust or end up average, at best.
 
I would be very surprised if the Hawks were willing to deal the Pelicans pick for Sabonis. Tankathon shows the Hawks getting the Cavs pick, though, under “complex conditions.” Not sure what those are.
 
LPKingsFan said:
I would be very surprised if the Hawks were willing to deal the Pelicans pick for Sabonis. Tankathon shows the Hawks getting the Cavs pick, though, under “complex conditions.” Not sure what those are.
Click to expand...
So...
Atlanta will receive the more favorable of (i) the less favorable of its 2026 1st round pick and San Antonio's 2026 1st round pick and (ii) the less favorable of (a) the Cleveland pick and (b) the more favorable of the Utah pick if conveyable and the Minnesota pick [or (ii) the Cleveland pick if the Utah pick is not conveyable] and Cleveland will receive the less favorable of (i) and (ii) (if the Utah pick falls within its protected range and is therefore not conveyable, then Minnesota's and Cleveland's obligations to Utah will be extinguished)
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm watching the football game, so you can parse that garbage out if you want.
 
Warhawk said:
Yeah, I know, but draft picks are ALWAYS a gamble to me. Even former "high" picks in "strong" drafts fail all the time. I always give the nudge to a known commodity than a hypothetical pick. I'd rather have Domas than a Bennett, or Oden, or MKG, etc., for instance. Without knowing where that pick may land, I'd push for more, even a protected future pick or a couple seconds. That's just me. 🤷‍♂️ I have little faith that high picks will ever end up being All Stars, with very few exceptions. We always put such picks on a pedestal and they often bust or end up average, at best.
Click to expand...

Given how asset-strapped the Kings are, the only route to building a sustainable winner is through the draft. It's sort of a "like it or not" landscape for this franchise, which is why they need to do the hard work of collecting as many first rounders as possible. Given the reality that "busts happen," you want to give yourself more dice rolls, otherwise you very likely consign yourself to a purgatory from which it can be deeply challenging to extricate yourself. I'd take that hypothetical Domas deal and wouldn't think twice about it. Getting two potential top-5 cracks at a star-level talent in what is considered to be a strong draft is a much better odds play when you're rebuilding than chasing depressed assets and known commodities. All of that said, I really don't think Domas is a chip who gets you New Orleans' 2026 first rounder.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
So...

Yeah, I'm watching the football game, so you can parse that garbage out if you want.
Click to expand...
I went over to Tankathon just to see where this pick lives - currently 18th. It is projected to Hawks so most likely whoever started this rumor was just looking at Tankathon and not actually looking at what the Hawks have. Although its a great exhibit to anyone who still thinks we couldn't pick swap our 2031 pick with Spurs any further.

BTW, 18th pick, Risacher widely considered the worst top 5 pick of 2024, and an expiring Kristaps sounds to me like a straight salary dump. Surely we can do better?
 
pdxKingsFan said:
I went over to Tankathon just to see where this pick lives - currently 18th. It is projected to Hawks so most likely whoever started this rumor was just looking at Tankathon and not actually looking at what the Hawks have. Although its a great exhibit to anyone who still thinks we couldn't pick swap our 2031 pick with Spurs any further.

BTW, 18th pick, Risacher widely considered the worst top 5 pick of 2024, and an expiring Kristaps sounds to me like a straight salary dump. Surely we can do better?
Click to expand...
If I’m not mistaken (I probably am), the Hawks get the worst of the Spurs/Cavs/their own pick
 
Padrino said:
Given how asset-strapped the Kings are, the only route to building a sustainable winner is through the draft. It's sort of a "like it or not" landscape for this franchise, which is why they need to do the hard work of collecting as many first rounders as possible. Given the reality that "busts happen," you want to give yourself more dice rolls, otherwise you very likely consign yourself to a purgatory from which it can be deeply challenging to extricate yourself. I'd take that hypothetical Domas deal and wouldn't think twice about it. Getting two potential top-5 cracks at a star-level talent in what is considered to be a strong draft is a much better odds play when you're rebuilding than chasing depressed assets and known commodities. All of that said, I really don't think Domas is a chip who gets you New Orleans' 2026 first rounder.
Click to expand...
Hypothetically, I understand. But the Kings, in their two highest draft picks in 40 years of Sacramento drafting, have ended up with Ellison and Bagley. You can't convince me that a high draft pick is a panacea, "strong" draft or not, until the pick actually turns into an NBA player. And trading our best player / all-star for just one "swing" at it isn't my idea of a good gamble. 🤷‍♂️

We'll have one fairly high pick whether we trade Domas for one or not.

Sacramento's previous history of multiple first round picks in the same draft resulted in:
  • 2017: Fox, Justin Jackson, and Giles
  • 2016: Papa G, Malachi, and Skal
  • 2009: Evans and Casspi
  • 1991: Owens and Chilcutt (Owens, obviously, brought back The Rock in trade)
  • 1990: Simmons, Mays, Causwell, and Bonner
So, again, forgive me if I am not overly excited to trade away our top talent for just one additional first round pick. We've seen how that turns out. We all get excited at first and then...
 
Capt. Factorial said:
18th pick couldn't possibly get it done. The potential temptation is if the NOP unprotected 2026 pick is part of a package.
Click to expand...
My post saying no way this deal sucks on reddit is massively downvoted. Are folks in the rest of the world that down on Domas? I know a lot of twitter hates him for no other reason than he converted to his wife's religion.
 
Warhawk said:
Hypothetically, I understand. But the Kings, in their two highest draft picks in 40 years of Sacramento drafting, have ended up with Ellison and Bagley. You can't convince me that a high draft pick is a panacea, "strong" draft or not, until the pick actually turns into an NBA player. And trading our best player / all-star for just one "swing" at it isn't my idea of a good gamble. 🤷‍♂️

We'll have one fairly high pick whether we trade Domas for one or not.

Sacramento's previous history of multiple first round picks in the same draft resulted in:
  • 2017: Fox, Justin Jackson, and Giles
  • 2016: Papa G, Malachi, and Skal
  • 2009: Evans and Casspi
  • 1991: Owens and Chilcutt (Owens, obviously, brought back The Rock in trade)
  • 1990: Simmons, Mays, Causwell, and Bonner
So, again, forgive me if I am not overly excited to trade away our top talent for just one additional first round pick. We've seen how that turns out. We all get excited at first and then...
Click to expand...

But you're kind of making my point for me. The draft is always a crap shoot. You can go in with all of the acumen, scouting, and certainty in the world, and nothing can prepare you for the many variables at play that ultimately determine whether or not a star will be born from your draft selection. Thus, it's necessary to load as many rounds into the barrel as possible. Acquire every future first rounder you can get your hands on. Sam Presti understood this principle when he built the current iteration of the Oklahoma City Thunder, a reigning champ that still has bullets to queue up in the chamber, so diligent and intentional was their rebuilding process.

If the Kings could get two shots at a star in the lottery of this year's draft instead of just one, it would be an absolute coup, and one you simply could not turn down for any reason. The Kings are 8-30, asset poor, and do not possess the luxury of pretending that the draft isn't their best and only shot at rebuilding properly. Is it a guarantee? Absolutely not. The Wizards and Jazz are good examples of multi-year, draft-focused rebuilds that have gone nowhere as of yet. But the fact remains that there is no other strategy to execute here that doesn't leave the Kings on a mediocrity treadmill in perpetuity. Where else are they coming by star talent?
 
Padrino said:
But you're kind of making my point for me. The draft is always a crap shoot. You can go in with all of the acumen, scouting, and certainty in the world, and nothing can prepare you for the many variables at play that ultimately determine whether or not a star will be born from your draft selection. Thus, it's necessary to load as many rounds into the barrel as possible. Acquire every future first rounder you can get your hands on. Sam Presti understood this principle when he built the current iteration of the Oklahoma City Thunder, a reigning champ that still has bullets to queue up in the chamber, so diligent and intentional was their rebuilding process.

If the Kings could get two shots at a star in the lottery of this year's draft instead of just one, it would be an absolute coup, and one you simply could not turn down for any reason. The Kings are 8-30, asset poor, and do not possess the luxury of pretending that the draft isn't their best and only shot at rebuilding properly. Is it a guarantee? Absolutely not. The Wizards and Jazz are good examples of multi-year, draft-focused rebuilds that have gone nowhere as of yet. But the fact remains that there is no other strategy to execute here that doesn't leave the Kings on a mediocrity treadmill in perpetuity. Where else are they coming by star talent?
Click to expand...
How about we just keep our all-star talent instead of such a minimal return? I mean, it's kind of obvious. ;) You're hoping to draft someone as good as Domas on an acknowledged "crap shoot" when you have that in hand already!

When you're "asset poor", trading the best all-star talent you have for a single unknown pick in a "crap shoot" isn't my idea of a good plan. 🤷‍♂️
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top