2021-22 NBA In-Season News/Transactions

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,622
Yeah man, Kemba sucks, this is not a surprise. Unbelievable we were able to get off his money. Too bad Ime is trying to kill Al.
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,695
Yeah man, Kemba sucks, this is not a surprise. Unbelievable we were able to get off his money. Too bad Ime is trying to kill Al.
A team like OKC burying a good player like Al sure seems counter-productive. I get they were tanking, but it isn't like he's so good he was going to win them many more games. Why not play him 18-20 minutes a game in a way that shows off his skills (and that in Philly he was just in a bad position) and show how he can still be productive? Wouldn't that be more in OKC's long-term interest?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
A team like OKC burying a good player like Al sure seems counter-productive. I get they were tanking, but it isn't like he's so good he was going to win them many more games. Why not play him 18-20 minutes a game in a way that shows off his skills (and that in Philly he was just in a bad position) and show how he can still be productive? Wouldn't that be more in OKC's long-term interest?
OKC basically ended up with 2 first round picks for trading Horford.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
A team like OKC burying a good player like Al sure seems counter-productive. I get they were tanking, but it isn't like he's so good he was going to win them many more games. Why not play him 18-20 minutes a game in a way that shows off his skills (and that in Philly he was just in a bad position) and show how he can still be productive? Wouldn't that be more in OKC's long-term interest?
Everyone in the league knows what Horford is. The only thing that playing him accomplished is potential downside be it injury and/or not giving youth minutes in a tank season. It benefits Horford too as he doesn’t have to go through the pain and torture of losing on a rebuilding team…..he got to spend time at home with his family and work out when he wanted while getting paid.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
A team like OKC burying a good player like Al sure seems counter-productive. I get they were tanking, but it isn't like he's so good he was going to win them many more games. Why not play him 18-20 minutes a game in a way that shows off his skills (and that in Philly he was just in a bad position) and show how he can still be productive? Wouldn't that be more in OKC's long-term interest?
You'd think he wouldn't make a difference, but they were winning a decent number of games before he got shut down. Every loss counts when you're tanking. (Plus Horford being a known quantity whose market value goes up if he's rested/doesn't play).
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,695
You'd think he wouldn't make a difference, but they were winning a decent number of games before he got shut down. Every loss counts when you're tanking. (Plus Horford being a known quantity whose market value goes up if he's rested/doesn't play).
Totally fair, you're right -- as are the comments above about Al.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,673
OKC also basically benched SGA during the second half of the season because they were tanking.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
Moving on to Irving, you have to wonder what his basketball value is at present. He can't play in many places, won't play in other situations and despite his basketball brilliance, the guy doesn't give off any indication that he loves the sport (contrast with Durant who, when not being the GOAT of petty social media, seems to be all about hoops) or competing anymore.

If the Nets tried to move him today, who would take him even if you removed cap considerations etc? I can see both sides but were I a GM, he would be the absolute last option to look at as any sort of roster addition these days.

Edit: And I say this knowing that his skillset would fit nicely with the current C's roster. As we know, that won't work in reality.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
6,055
Moving on to Irving, you have to wonder what his basketball value is at present. He can't play in many places, won't play in other situations and despite his basketball brilliance, the guy doesn't give off any indication that he loves basketball (contrast with Durant who, when not being the GOAT of petty social media, seems to be all about hoops) or competing anymore.

If the Nets tried to move him today, who would take him even if you removed cap considerations etc? I can see both sides but were I a GM, he would be the absolute last option to look at as any sort of roster addition these days.

Edit: And I say this knowing that his skillset would fit nicely with the current C's roster. As we know, that won't work in reality.
I'm beginning to wonder if his ignorance was really a cover for recovering from injuries. His situation is incredibly bizarre. He's essentially retired and he's young.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
I'm beginning to wonder if his ignorance was really a cover for recovering from injuries. His situation is incredibly bizarre. He's essentially retired and he's young.
It is bizarre but on the other hand, Irving has a ring and has earned close to $200mm prior to this season. You might be right - maybe this is him doing the NBA early-retirement-still-getting-them-checks move.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Moving on to Irving, you have to wonder what his basketball value is at present. He can't play in many places, won't play in other situations and despite his basketball brilliance, the guy doesn't give off any indication that he loves the sport (contrast with Durant who, when not being the GOAT of petty social media, seems to be all about hoops) or competing anymore.

If the Nets tried to move him today, who would take him even if you removed cap considerations etc? I can see both sides but were I a GM, he would be the absolute last option to look at as any sort of roster addition these days.

Edit: And I say this knowing that his skillset would fit nicely with the current C's roster. As we know, that won't work in reality.
Irving has also been injury prone over the past few years, and that doesn't usually get better as a player gets older.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,021
Imaginationland
Irving has also been injury prone over the past few years, and that doesn't usually get better as a player gets older.
Injury prone is putting it nicely. He's been hurt and missed the end of his team's season in 3 of the last 4 years. Even before you get to the off the court stuff, he's totally unreliable.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
View: https://twitter.com/trailblazers/status/1466816427524964353


Neil Olshey fired after internal investigation.

VERY interesting since he was the one most tied to the idea that coach was the issue (it wasn't) and that the defensive problems weren't a roster issue (they are).

Probably takes a bit for them to hire a new GM, but after that.... I would expect CJ McCollum to become very available.

Edit- Independent not internal.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
View: https://twitter.com/trailblazers/status/1466816427524964353


Neil Olshey fired after internal investigation.

VERY interesting since he was the one most tied to the idea that coach was the issue (it wasn't) and that the defensive problems weren't a roster issue (they are).

Probably takes a bit for them to hire a new GM, but after that.... I would expect CJ McCollum to become very available.

Edit- Independent not internal.
To me, this suggests the odds of Lillard being dealt go up. Its a gutsy move for a new GM given Lillard is the face of their franchise but Dame is 32 in July and that core feels like its tested its ceiling. A potential Lillard deal would likely garner a much better return than McCollum too.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,124
Santa Monica
View: https://twitter.com/trailblazers/status/1466816427524964353


Neil Olshey fired after internal investigation.

VERY interesting since he was the one most tied to the idea that coach was the issue (it wasn't) and that the defensive problems weren't a roster issue (they are).

Probably takes a bit for them to hire a new GM, but after that.... I would expect CJ McCollum to become very available.

Edit- Independent not internal.
McCollum+ for Simmons was my immediate knee-jerk reaction when Ben initially asked out. CJ is a better version of Seth Curry, who has flourished in Philly
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
The other question is whether, with a new GM, they simply decide it is time to blow it up. They seem stuck in the middle to me. So it could be an "and" rather than "or' on Dame/McCollum

If they put Dame, McCollum, Covington, and Nurkic on market they could get a very nice set of assets back.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
The other question is whether, with a new GM, they simply decide it is time to blow it up. They seem stuck in the middle to me. So it could be an "and" rather than "or' on Dame/McCollum

If they put Dame, McCollum, Covington, and Nurkic on market they could get a very nice set of assets back.
Yes absolutely. A new GM is going to want to make it HIS team anyway if at all possible and the Blazers were easy to blow up anyway. I’d expect both to be available as well as your Nurkics and (so overrated) Covington.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
I get the thought process, but.... Dame is incredibly popular in POR, it's a tough sell to the fanbase to trade him. Now a GM might, but I think they try some other stuff first an let Dame ASK out.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,849
NYC
I wonder what Dame’s trade value looks like these days. I’d guess it’s taken a pretty big hit from last year’s playoffs (when he looked like the tier A franchise player he’d been for a half-decade) to now, after the worrisome core issues, a 700-minute sample this season in which he has put up .526 TS, and a desultory Team USA showing where he looked physically diminished (why did he play in the Olympics with core issues, again?)

I assume/hope the core issues are nowhere near the level of Kemba’s knees or IT’s hip, but I’d think even the whiff of physical decline, with his contract that escalates to almost $50M in 2024-25, might give many GMs pause. If they were going to blow it up, the optimal time to do it might have been at the end of last season. As it stands, they’re probably better off keeping Dame and letting him heal up and show he’s still Dame and not Kemba/IT Redux.

As for CJ: I’ve been advocating trading him for years (including for Wiggins, which I still think would have been great for them) but I suspect his trade value at age 30 is now borderline negative.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
What's tricky about holding onto Dame is that I suspect it is hard to play this halfway: Dame (I am guessing) doesn't want to be on a roster where all the other vets have been traded and you're losing 50 games. And if you keep this group together you have only a very small chance of winning much of anything.

So, I don't know what they will do but imagine it is an ownership call. It also might be that they tell Dame "we're trading everyone else" and let him pick whether he wants to play out a rebuild or not. I'd guess not, but agree there's a material chance he is the exception who cares more about where he is playing than whether he can win.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
Agreed that if Portland elects to rebuild, they almost have to start by moving Dame first. By definition, if he is on the block, the rest are likely as well. The fly in the ointment for this season is how the COVID situation plays out. I agree with the others who feel like its bound to a bigger story and have a more impact than last year.

Finding a deal that makes sense for all sides for a Lillard or McCollum seems challenging in normal times given their contracts, age and profiles (I can easily see why Philly might not want McCollum as the main return for Simmons and I like CJ) but in a potential Omnicron season, that may be a lot trickier.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
Philly makes a lot of sense for Dame because they need to win now with their best player being a 7'0 center who's 28 in March but it requires Portland to be interested in Simmons, which they very well might not be. Guess it could always be a 3 way deal but those aren't easy to orchestrate. There are plenty of teams who would love to take Dame but who don't really have the assets.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
A Lillard trade is fascinating. There are really only a few spots that make sense. Presumably he needs to go to a contender so that rules out dealing with someone like a Presti who has a lot of the things you'd want to ask for in a rebuild. Meanwhile the contending teams are all sorts of constrained but they also have the salaries to make the money work.

That said, if Lillard comes on to the market, I would expect the bidding to be furious. And I would expect the Celtics to be amongst the teams asking even if they may not have the pieces to get something done.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
Great news---there is the one person who we know values Romeo, Smart, TL, and Nesmith more than average!
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,124
Santa Monica
I wonder what Dame’s trade value looks like these days. I’d guess it’s taken a pretty big hit from last year’s playoffs (when he looked like the tier A franchise player he’d been for a half-decade) to now, after the worrisome core issues, a 700-minute sample this season in which he has put up .526 TS, and a desultory Team USA showing where he looked physically diminished (why did he play in the Olympics with core issues, again?)

I assume/hope the core issues are nowhere near the level of Kemba’s knees or IT’s hip, but I’d think even the whiff of physical decline, with his contract that escalates to almost $50M in 2024-25, might give many GMs pause. If they were going to blow it up, the optimal time to do it might have been at the end of last season. As it stands, they’re probably better off keeping Dame and letting him heal up and show he’s still Dame and not Kemba/IT Redux.

As for CJ: I’ve been advocating trading him for years (including for Wiggins, which I still think would have been great for them) but I suspect his trade value at age 30 is now borderline negative.
Yep, some of us threw out Jaylen Brown fake trades a few days ago but I'm not moving JB for Dame.

Dame has IT/Kemba written all over him, the decline will be sharp/sudden
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
Yep, some of us threw out Jaylen Brown fake trades a few days ago but I'm not moving JB for Dame.

Dame has IT/Kemba written all over him, the decline will be sharp/sudden
I’d do it for Smart/Horford/young’ns and picks or something like that but obviously they wouldn’t. His shooting is way down this year. Might be related to injury or could be a sign of a decline. We’ll see. In any event, I wouldn’t be too excited to have his age 32-35 seasons at the money he’s getting paid.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,124
Santa Monica
I’d do it for Smart/Horford/young’ns and picks or something like that but obviously they wouldn’t. His shooting is way down this year. Might be related to injury or could be a sign of a decline. We’ll see. In any event, I wouldn’t be too excited to have his age 32-35 seasons at the money he’s getting paid.
Agreed, deal built around Horford's salary + young guys + draft picks is worth it for Boston
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
That's a great trade proposal...for the Celtics. I know no more than anyone here but if Boston were to engage with Portland on Lillard right now, my guess is the Blazers start by asking for Tatum but will not do a deal with the Celtics for less than Brown+.

As a side note, I would consider the deal depending on the other parts and Jaylen is one of my favorite current players. I understand why others would not even consider this deal. In any event, Lillard isn't even on the market yet and I am guessing the true contenders will have pole position over the middling teams like Boston.

Edit: to clarify, while health is clearly an issue for Lillard at present, I am making the assumption its not a long term decline issue. It it is, that is a different story altogether.
 
Last edited:

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
That's a great trade proposal...for the Celtics. I know no more than anyone here but if Boston were to engage with Portland on Lillard right now, my guess is the Blazers start by asking for Tatum but will not do a deal with the Celtics for less than Brown+.

As a side note, I would consider the deal depending on the other parts and Jaylen is one of my favorite current players. I understand why others would not even consider this deal. In any event, Lillard isn't even on the market yet and I am guessing the true contenders will have pole position over the middling teams like Boston.

Edit: to clarify, while health is clearly an issue for Lillard at present, I am making the assumption its not a long term decline issue. It it is, that is a different story altogether.
You really think they would seriously ask for Tatum given Lillard’s age? Maybe, but I think Jaylen is the logical place to start. I’m still at the point where moving Jaylen would be tough but I’d at least listen. Feel like any major shake up like this would involve other moving parts since I don’t think replacing Jaylen with Lillard really solves anything.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
You really think they would seriously ask for Tatum given Lillard’s age? Maybe, but I think Jaylen is the logical place to start. I’m still at the point where moving Jaylen would be tough but I’d at least listen. Feel like any major shake up like this would involve other moving parts since I don’t think replacing Jaylen with Lillard really solves anything.
I assume that every trade conversation between Boston and another NBA team starts off with a discussion of what would it take to pry Tatum away. If I were calling, I would tell my counterpart proactively that I am asking early and often every time so they know what to expect. And I would also expect the Celtics to utter a Logan Roy type response in each instance.

To be clear, Boston isn't likely to trade Tatum in a package for Lillard and PDX likely knows this. Its just a starting point.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,124
Santa Monica
Maybe PDX could be sold on native son Payton Pritchard's box office appeal?
1st step is to bring home their original prodigal son

Then Danny could bring home Oregon's 2nd son.

If they go into blow-up mode Norman Powell or Nance would be interesting

You really think they would seriously ask for Tatum given Lillard’s age? Maybe, but I think Jaylen is the logical place to start. I’m still at the point where moving Jaylen would be tough but I’d at least listen. Feel like any major shake up like this would involve other moving parts since I don’t think replacing Jaylen with Lillard really solves anything.
They can ask but Tatum isn't happening.

Doubt Brown + more Celtic assets is even considered by Boston.

Don't love the idea of moving a 25yr old All-Star (3yrs @$80MM) wing for a 31.5yr old PG that is eventually going to cost ~$50MM (next 4yrs @$177MM). I know it's Monopoly money to some, but not sure that's a clever way to budget a payroll for Tatum's peak seasons.
 
Last edited:

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
They can ask but Tatum isn't happening.

Doubt Brown + more Celtic assets is even considered by Boston.

Don't love the idea of moving a 25yr old All-Star (3yrs @$80MM) wing for a 31.5yr old PG that is eventually going to cost ~$50MM (next 4yrs @$177MM). I know it's Monopoly money to some, but not sure that's a clever way to budget a payroll for Tatum's peak seasons.
Yeah, Jaylen+ for Lillard doesn't make much sense to me unless it's part of a larger roster restructuring. It's fair from a potential value standpoint since, when healthy, Lillard is a better talent but doesn't make sense to shorten this team's window when it doesn't appear to be close to contending.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
As spectulated when Olshey was canned, certainly feels like Portland may be "open for business" as we approach the deadline.

Some really interesting assets of different types on that roster: Dame (who I can't really see Celts going for/getting); McCollum; Powell; Nurkic; Covington; Nance.

Given Celts exceptions, breadth of salaries, and need to get better can see a lot of combinations there, though "what is Portland trying to accomplish" remains the big question: I'd imagine they will blow it all up, but easily could do some form of re-load instead (which I don't believe can work for them, but given new owner and new GM incoming can't be ruled out)

For me, Powell is a potentially great fit for Celtics - as would be Nance. Though I believe Powell is locked up restriction-wise unitl offseason