Trade Thread (EPISODE VII: Which team wants our bad players for their good players?)

[CDM_Stats]

I think Curry parallel, while sensible, doesn't really apply. ATL added DJM to give Trae more time off-ball, and Trae basically refused to adapt his game. Curry is one of the elite cutters and movers in NBA history. Trae is a lot more Iverson than Curry...I believe Trae has excelled at every level playing the way he does and coaching won't change that, at this point. Supposedly, most of the team sided with the (now-fired) Coach, which is pretty telling about how Trae looks at his role...I also, kind of, don't blame him and think the smartest coach will work around that, like you would with Luka.

You sure? I'm not saying it would definitely work, but Curry in 2013 wouldn't be parallel with Curry's career either. Ball dominant for 1.5 years of his college career, 5 years of ball dominant PG play (aged 25 at the time, pivoted at age 26 to a motion offense team). Trae had a ball dominant college "career", 6 years of ball dominant PG play at the time, and he's about to turn 26.. Magic are a type of motion offense team - a little iso heavy for my taste but to be expected with their pillars being so young. But point being.. if using the same criteria, you'd also be considering passing on Steph Curry in 2013, who wasn't considered an elite cutter or mover at that time

Figuring if it would work would take some knowledge - mainly, Trae's personality/willingness to adapt - that we as fans dont have, but the upside could be tremendous. Figure it would be an easy sell too - could literally just point at Curry. The other bugaboo would be Trae's stamina, as Curry is **** machine.. but just looking at his distance tracking makes me think Trae could handle it. I wouldnt write it off, because it's a championship level upside kind of move. And unless the Magic are pushing for Booker (which they should), the rest of the options look more like singles and doubles for a team that could be swinging for the fences and striking while the iron is hot

Believe me, if ORL gets Trae without giving up Paolo, Franz, and Suggs...I'll be VERY excited and on board

but sitting here, in the summer, with my slide rule and calculator at hand, I don't like the fit. I guess I point to the fact that it's, essentially, been decided that DJM or Trae will be moved this summer...that's evidence, to me, that it didn't work out...who knows, maybe it's DJM's fault, but most of what I recall was that, according to media outlets, Trae just couldn't adapt. Maybe a trade would be the slap-in-the-face he needs to be the best player he can.

I believe its possible, but never know.. just takes one GM to overpay. And Trae has enough hype that someone who's trying to save their job might just give it a try

As for the DJM/Trae thing.. I always think the incumbent has the advantage. For example, I think the typical way of doing things is that the new guy adapts to the old guy.. if Trae gets dealt, he's clearly not that franchise guy, and he'll be walking into Paolo and Franz's team. So I think he'd be the one to adjust, or at least that would be the expectation. Also unlike Atlanta, Orlando is brimming with smart players and ball movers. To your point, if the price is right, I'd love to see it. If not, there are a lot of other options

Hopefully one of them isnt Klay though.. not for our sake, for yours. So many better options for an upstart team

[Onus]

You sure? I'm not saying it would definitely work, but Curry in 2013 wouldn't be parallel with Curry's career either. Ball dominant for 1.5 years of his college career, 5 years of ball dominant PG play (aged 25 at the time, pivoted at age 26 to a motion offense team). Trae had a ball dominant college "career", 6 years of ball dominant PG play at the time, and he's about to turn 26.. Magic are a type of motion offense team - a little iso heavy for my taste but to be expected with their pillars being so young. But point being.. if using the same criteria, you'd also be considering passing on Steph Curry in 2013, who wasn't considered an elite cutter or mover at that time

Figuring if it would work would take some knowledge - mainly, Trae's personality/willingness to adapt - that we as fans dont have, but the upside could be tremendous. Figure it would be an easy sell too - could literally just point at Curry. The other bugaboo would be Trae's stamina, as Curry is **** machine.. but just looking at his distance tracking makes me think Trae could handle it. I wouldnt write it off, because its a championship level upside kind of move. And unless the Magic are pushing for Booker (which they should), the rest of the options look more like singles and doubles for a team that could be swinging for the fences and striking while the iron is hot

Wait why do you think curry was ball dominant in college for 1.5 years? He played off ball in college until his junior year where they switched him to pg since that was the position he would need to play in the nba.

They actually made the switch in his sophomore season.. whatever positionally they wanted to call it, he became the increase in touches and handles happened towards the end of his 2nd season. Junior season is where he did it all season and proved he could do it

What was weird is that in his 2nd season, Steph was getting more touches than their ball-dominant PG (forget his name now) against the crappier teams, and less against the good ones. So it was a transitional period for him.. and that led to the 3rd year where he was the full time PG

Jason Richard’s no clue why his name stuck w me.

[ILOVEIT]

You'd want Trae on the Magic?

Absolutely not (and I'm a fan). I'd love Murray but Trae (or even Luka) are so ball-dominant that it would basically shift the whole emphasis of the offense away from what Paolo and Franz do best. A combo guard with some PG skills, PnR ability, shooting, and overall scoring would be the ticket...that could be Monk, Garland, Herro, Simons, etc...but if you're ORL and you don't want to mess with your defensive identity - that leaves Murray and few others. Just talking fit-not overall value or place in the league.

Ball-dominant isnt a trait, its a symptom.. the Hawks drafted him as that, played him as that, because they needed him to be *the* guy. Magic wouldn't have that need, not as badly, so probably wouldnt need to deploy him the same way

Steph Curry, under Mark Jackson, was ball-dominant. Steph Curry, under Steve Kerr, was not, and became something better

As for defense, yeah, Trae sucks at that. But Magic are getting dangerously close to diminishing returns when stocking up on something.. excellent defensive team. But when they need a shot created, its a glut of secondary handlers. When they need a 3pt shot taken, its a glut of average shooters. I think they could easily take the defensive hit of a lackluster defensive PG if it knocks out 2 other huge needs at the same time.. its what the Warriors built around

No....it's a trait. Are you saying that Luka and Irving would thrive catching the ball, checking what's open, then passing it on? Barkley, Jordan . . . the greats want the ball in their hands. ISO ball is the symptom of a ball dominant player. Curry is a completely outlier. Why? Because Curry thrives moving without the ball...not with it. He played that roll in college. Jackson took him out of his strength. Curry is NOT naturally a ball dominant player.

[Commodor]

Probably mentioned already but with the Athletic’s speculation that GSW would target Jimmy Butler what about:

CP3, Wiggins, Payton for Butler, Robinson.

Probably need to add draft capital or young prospects but Heat get two shorter contracts in cp3 and Payton (assuming opt ins) + Wiggins who is what he is. Warriors make a final push with Curry-Butler as the core of it. Robinson provides some shooting but mostly salary balancing.

[CDM_Stats]

Absolutely not (and I'm a fan). I'd love Murray but Trae (or even Luka) are so ball-dominant that it would basically shift the whole emphasis of the offense away from what Paolo and Franz do best. A combo guard with some PG skills, PnR ability, shooting, and overall scoring would be the ticket...that could be Monk, Garland, Herro, Simons, etc...but if you're ORL and you don't want to mess with your defensive identity - that leaves Murray and few others. Just talking fit-not overall value or place in the league.

Ball-dominant isnt a trait, its a symptom.. the Hawks drafted him as that, played him as that, because they needed him to be *the* guy. Magic wouldn't have that need, not as badly, so probably wouldnt need to deploy him the same way

Steph Curry, under Mark Jackson, was ball-dominant. Steph Curry, under Steve Kerr, was not, and became something better

As for defense, yeah, Trae sucks at that. But Magic are getting dangerously close to diminishing returns when stocking up on something.. excellent defensive team. But when they need a shot created, its a glut of secondary handlers. When they need a 3pt shot taken, its a glut of average shooters. I think they could easily take the defensive hit of a lackluster defensive PG if it knocks out 2 other huge needs at the same time.. its what the Warriors built around

No....it's a trait. Are you saying that Luka and Irving would thrive catching the ball, checking what's open, then passing it on? Barkley, Jordan . . . the greats want the ball in their hands. ISO ball is the symptom of a ball dominant player. Curry is a completely outlier. Why? Because Curry thrives moving without the ball...not with it. He played that roll in college. Jackson took him out of his strength. Curry is NOT naturally a ball dominant player.

No, its not. You can't just change the definition.. anyone can be ball-dominant. It can be changed on a whim. Kevon Looney can be ball-dominant if the coach wanted him to be

If the Mavs played a PG who took the ball out of Luka's hands - not that they ever would - then he wouldnt be ball-dominant. Because it literally describes what's happening, the result of an outcome. The fact that he thrives in it is because he's a good decision maker, an efficient 3 level scorer, a great handler, and has borderline elite change of direction. Those are traits. Those things cannot be altered

[Skybox]

Ball-dominant isnt a trait, its a symptom.. the Hawks drafted him as that, played him as that, because they needed him to be *the* guy. Magic wouldn't have that need, not as badly, so probably wouldnt need to deploy him the same way

Steph Curry, under Mark Jackson, was ball-dominant. Steph Curry, under Steve Kerr, was not, and became something better

As for defense, yeah, Trae sucks at that. But Magic are getting dangerously close to diminishing returns when stocking up on something.. excellent defensive team. But when they need a shot created, its a glut of secondary handlers. When they need a 3pt shot taken, its a glut of average shooters. I think they could easily take the defensive hit of a lackluster defensive PG if it knocks out 2 other huge needs at the same time.. its what the Warriors built around

No....it's a trait. Are you saying that Luka and Irving would thrive catching the ball, checking what's open, then passing it on? Barkley, Jordan . . . the greats want the ball in their hands. ISO ball is the symptom of a ball dominant player. Curry is a completely outlier. Why? Because Curry thrives moving without the ball...not with it. He played that roll in college. Jackson took him out of his strength. Curry is NOT naturally a ball dominant player.

No, its not. You can't just change the definition.. anyone can be ball-dominant. It can be changed on a whim. Kevon Looney can be ball-dominant if the coach wanted him to be

IF that were remotely true...Murray & Trae would be a great backcourt. Trae would not share...and, "Coach told me to"? -ask Nate McMillan how that worked out.

[Onus]

No....it's a trait. Are you saying that Luka and Irving would thrive catching the ball, checking what's open, then passing it on? Barkley, Jordan . . . the greats want the ball in their hands. ISO ball is the symptom of a ball dominant player. Curry is a completely outlier. Why? Because Curry thrives moving without the ball...not with it. He played that roll in college. Jackson took him out of his strength. Curry is NOT naturally a ball dominant player.

No, its not. You can't just change the definition.. anyone can be ball-dominant. It can be changed on a whim. Kevon Looney can be ball-dominant if the coach wanted him to be

IF that were remotely true...Murray & Trae would be a great backcourt. Trae would not share...and, "Coach told me to"? -ask Nate McMillan how that worked out.

Traditional NBA scouting believes you can take a ball dominant player and teach them how to play off ball. It's why nba draft prospects with low usage in college are really looked down upon even though technically they would be playing the same role from college to the NBA and we've seen them succeed in that role. But for some reason NBA scouting would rather take the player who was ball dominant in college and turn him into a spot up shooter. Then when that player struggles to fulfill that role they say that player is a bust rather than just taking the player that is already playing that role in college to play that same role in the NBA. I get it somewhat, you want variety and you want stars, so being able to show that shot creation even though that won't be your role in the nba is supposed to be valuable ... Some players can adapt and some can't. Some players thrive in a low usage role and then get better. Some players thrive in a high usage role and then when taking away usage they get worse and vice versa.

Trae has shown he doesn't want to play off the ball. Has gotten coaches fired for trying to do so. Will just stand around when he's off the ball. Maybe if he gets traded that changes since he will no longer be the star player that the franchise will bend over backwards for. Probably will take a few stops for it to sink in that for him to stay in the league he'll need to learn to play off the ball. Eh whatever.

It's funny that now that ATL is looking to trade Trae the rumors are that teams rather trade for DJM, and teams didn't even want DJM for 2 1sts. LMAO. Trae aint getting 2 firsts that's for sure and we'll see what ATL does. They should probably just trade both of them and start fresh. Better year to tank as well.

[Skybox]

No, its not. You can't just change the definition.. anyone can be ball-dominant. It can be changed on a whim. Kevon Looney can be ball-dominant if the coach wanted him to be

IF that were remotely true...Murray & Trae would be a great backcourt. Trae would not share...and, "Coach told me to"? -ask Nate McMillan how that worked out.

Traditional NBA scouting believes you can take a ball dominant player and teach them how to play off ball. It's why nba draft prospects with low usage in college are really looked down upon even though technically they would be playing the same role from college to the NBA and we've seen them succeed in that role. But for some reason NBA scouting would rather take the player who was ball dominant in college and turn him into a spot up shooter. Then when that player struggles to fulfill that role they say that player is a bust rather than just taking the player that is already playing that role in college to play that same role in the NBA. I get it somewhat, you want variety and you want stars, so being able to show that shot creation even though that won't be your role in the nba is supposed to be valuable ... Some players can adapt and some can't. Some players thrive in a low usage role and then get better. Some players thrive in a high usage role and then when taking away usage they get worse and vice versa.

Trae has shown he doesn't want to play off the ball. Has gotten coaches fired for trying to do so. Will just stand around when he's off the ball. Maybe if he gets traded that changes since he will no longer be the star player that the franchise will bend over backwards for. Probably will take a few stops for it to sink in that for him to stay in the league he'll need to learn to play off the ball. Eh whatever.

It's funny that now that ATL is looking to trade Trae the rumors are that teams rather trade for DJM, and teams didn't even want DJM for 2 1sts. LMAO. Trae aint getting 2 firsts that's for sure and we'll see what ATL does. They should probably just trade both of them and start fresh. Better year to tank as well.

So much of this is just media speculation too...ORL boards suddenly fired up about Trae but we really have no idea what's going on. If ATL did decide to move him, I think they'd want a serious impact player back - which ORL probably wouldn't do (picks are easier)

[CDM_Stats]

No....it's a trait. Are you saying that Luka and Irving would thrive catching the ball, checking what's open, then passing it on? Barkley, Jordan . . . the greats want the ball in their hands. ISO ball is the symptom of a ball dominant player. Curry is a completely outlier. Why? Because Curry thrives moving without the ball...not with it. He played that roll in college. Jackson took him out of his strength. Curry is NOT naturally a ball dominant player.

No, its not. You can't just change the definition.. anyone can be ball-dominant. It can be changed on a whim. Kevon Looney can be ball-dominant if the coach wanted him to be

IF that were remotely true...Murray & Trae would be a great backcourt. Trae would not share...and, "Coach told me to"? -ask Nate McMillan how that worked out.

lol i swear to god i hate this site sometimes

Ok fine ball dominant is a trait and not a representation of a result, words just mean whatever we want them to

[Onus]

IF that were remotely true...Murray & Trae would be a great backcourt. Trae would not share...and, "Coach told me to"? -ask Nate McMillan how that worked out.

Traditional NBA scouting believes you can take a ball dominant player and teach them how to play off ball. It's why nba draft prospects with low usage in college are really looked down upon even though technically they would be playing the same role from college to the NBA and we've seen them succeed in that role. But for some reason NBA scouting would rather take the player who was ball dominant in college and turn him into a spot up shooter. Then when that player struggles to fulfill that role they say that player is a bust rather than just taking the player that is already playing that role in college to play that same role in the NBA. I get it somewhat, you want variety and you want stars, so being able to show that shot creation even though that won't be your role in the nba is supposed to be valuable ... Some players can adapt and some can't. Some players thrive in a low usage role and then get better. Some players thrive in a high usage role and then when taking away usage they get worse and vice versa.

Trae has shown he doesn't want to play off the ball. Has gotten coaches fired for trying to do so. Will just stand around when he's off the ball. Maybe if he gets traded that changes since he will no longer be the star player that the franchise will bend over backwards for. Probably will take a few stops for it to sink in that for him to stay in the league he'll need to learn to play off the ball. Eh whatever.

It's funny that now that ATL is looking to trade Trae the rumors are that teams rather trade for DJM, and teams didn't even want DJM for 2 1sts. LMAO. Trae aint getting 2 firsts that's for sure and we'll see what ATL does. They should probably just trade both of them and start fresh. Better year to tank as well.

So much of this is just media speculation too...ORL boards suddenly fired up about Trae but we really have no idea what's going on. If ATL did decide to move him, I think they'd want a serious impact player back - which ORL probably wouldn't do (picks are easier)

I'd assume if they did trade either they have to continue to try to contend. But really without a top 10ish player or even one that has the potential to be that what's the point of trying to win a championship especially since the core around the team is mid. I guess they can't really tank since they traded unprotected picks for djm. LMAO So they would def need impact players rather than draft picks for them. Just not sure either have much value.

[Skybox]

Traditional NBA scouting believes you can take a ball dominant player and teach them how to play off ball. It's why nba draft prospects with low usage in college are really looked down upon even though technically they would be playing the same role from college to the NBA and we've seen them succeed in that role. But for some reason NBA scouting would rather take the player who was ball dominant in college and turn him into a spot up shooter. Then when that player struggles to fulfill that role they say that player is a bust rather than just taking the player that is already playing that role in college to play that same role in the NBA. I get it somewhat, you want variety and you want stars, so being able to show that shot creation even though that won't be your role in the nba is supposed to be valuable ... Some players can adapt and some can't. Some players thrive in a low usage role and then get better. Some players thrive in a high usage role and then when taking away usage they get worse and vice versa.

Trae has shown he doesn't want to play off the ball. Has gotten coaches fired for trying to do so. Will just stand around when he's off the ball. Maybe if he gets traded that changes since he will no longer be the star player that the franchise will bend over backwards for. Probably will take a few stops for it to sink in that for him to stay in the league he'll need to learn to play off the ball. Eh whatever.

It's funny that now that ATL is looking to trade Trae the rumors are that teams rather trade for DJM, and teams didn't even want DJM for 2 1sts. LMAO. Trae aint getting 2 firsts that's for sure and we'll see what ATL does. They should probably just trade both of them and start fresh. Better year to tank as well.

So much of this is just media speculation too...ORL boards suddenly fired up about Trae but we really have no idea what's going on. If ATL did decide to move him, I think they'd want a serious impact player back - which ORL probably wouldn't do (picks are easier)

I'd assume if they did trade either they have to continue to try to contend. But really without a top 10ish player or even one that has the potential to be that what's the point of trying to win a championship especially since the core around the team is mid. I guess they can't really tank since they traded unprotected picks for djm. LMAO So they would def need impact players rather than draft picks for them. Just not sure either have much value.

Logical targets would be Franz and/or Suggs...but, I highly doubt ORL listens to that. Maybe a 3-way, but I don't even know who has an impact player available for picks...maybe BRK will tap out but I don't even see Bridges as that big a get anymore (very good but...)

[CDM_Stats]

Trae has shown he doesn't want to play off the ball. Has gotten coaches fired for trying to do so. Will just stand around when he's off the ball. Maybe if he gets traded that changes since he will no longer be the star player that the franchise will bend over backwards for. Probably will take a few stops for it to sink in that for him to stay in the league he'll need to learn to play off the ball. Eh whatever.

It might take more than one stop, but hopefully not. Can see Trae thinking that it was Atlanta's defense that was the problem - which isn't an awful idea, considering they were bottom 5 almost every year he was there. But running off-ball is just 2 very easy concepts: effort and knowing personnel. Some would argue BBIQ as well, but to that I say: Klay Thompson. It takes the buy in of all 5 guys on the court and Atlanta never had that to begin with. Was it just Trae, or were the other guys static and bad at it as well? Cant just sprint around if screens arent coming or if the forwards/centers are just looking to isolate via PnR or getting themselves open

Magic are a lot better at that so there's a chance.. and there's few available players who can address 2 of their biggest needs in one swoop. Bonus points that his value isn't where it should be.. that said if he's got an ego about it, then yeah, screw it. Let him be a shooting John Wall if he wants instead of emulating Steph. But on the chance that he buys in with a team thats much better suited for it, I'd definitely kick the tires

Also the amount of "telephone" on the Trae Young stuff is out of hand. Pierce and McMillan have never run motion offenses. Both always spammed PnR. And Snyder did the same thing with basically 3 possessions going to Trae and 1 going to DJM. Very easy to blame the player, but the second Trae is out or on the bench, they do the exact same thing, all 3 of his coaches

[Onus]

So much of this is just media speculation too...ORL boards suddenly fired up about Trae but we really have no idea what's going on. If ATL did decide to move him, I think they'd want a serious impact player back - which ORL probably wouldn't do (picks are easier)

I'd assume if they did trade either they have to continue to try to contend. But really without a top 10ish player or even one that has the potential to be that what's the point of trying to win a championship especially since the core around the team is mid. I guess they can't really tank since they traded unprotected picks for djm. LMAO So they would def need impact players rather than draft picks for them. Just not sure either have much value.

Logical targets would be Franz and/or Suggs...but, I highly doubt ORL listens to that. Maybe a 3-way, but I don't even know who has an impact player available for picks...maybe BRK will tap out but I don't even see Bridges as that big a get anymore (very good but...)

If Franz or Suggs was available I'd be interested

Seriously surprised we didn't try to trade cp3 to you guys for anything. Really think he would've helped you guys last year get over that 1st round.

[ShayDee]

People don't watch the hawks to say what Trae has or hasn't shown on the court. This season however, he showed he is willing to let someone else be the no1 option if he is good enough to help win games. Towards the end of the season, if you check game logs Trae was most times hovering around the 3rd in shot attempts on the team and he was willing to allow DJM and Hunter take all the shots or everyone else. He may seem ball dominant but this year would see that he was also trying to move without the ball for some possessions

And CDM is right Trae can play offball if the system is built on it. Quin's system some would think as a more motion type offense but generally it wasn't. It's not like GS or the kings system that the whole team would set screens for each other and make the extra pass. It was mostly a high pnr and kick system which obviously caters to Trae's strengths as he is one of the best pnr players in the league but I think he can play in an offball system if he has to, he just didn't need to and the hawks does not have as many good passers and decision makers as people think to run a motion offense, y'all want Capela and Hunter to make smart quick decisions?

Plus the Hawks are likely to Keep Trae and move DJM because they landed the no1 pick, unless Trae requests to be traded and if that happens not many teams in the league would meet the Hawks asking price except maybe the spurs for hawks picks back but I don't know if many teams even want Trae that bad. His contract is expensive in contrast to what teams think he provides on the court, they think he is not a winning player and his defense sucks, and there have been reports teams prefer DJM because of his contract is cheaper