Offseason Rumors/News

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
5,187
Imaginationland
Can the smart people explain this to me for Atlanta? Are they going to convince Trae to give the ball up? DM needs the rock.
They desperately needed defense and two-way play, and Murray definitely provides that. We'll see how the fit goes, but I think this was a nice gamble for them.
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
5,986
The back of your computer
They desperately needed defense and two-way play, and Murray definitely provides that. We'll see how the fit goes, but I think this was a nice gamble for them.
And it didn't cost them John Collins. And the CHA pick is lottery-protected. And the swap may not occur (since SA may be worse than ATL for the forseeable future).
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
28,196
Wonder what that does to the “trade Collins” momentum—-accelerates it I’d guess?
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
9,251
Toscana via Kyiv
People here seem pretty sanguine about the Hawks giving up 2 unprotected 1sts and an unprotected swap for Murray, given how apoplectic they were about a better Celtics team giving up a top-1 swap for White.
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
5,986
The back of your computer
So, when does Pop retire? No way he is on the sidelines this season, right?
Mike Finger
@mikefinger

5m

Can report that Gregg Popovich gave his official blessing to the Murray trade and — while nothing is guaranteed, obviously — he’s completely on board with coaching a bunch of kids next season. As a team source just told me, he’s excited, “like he’s back at Pomona-Pitzer.”
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
46,387
Definitely a “for the right price” guy for me. Lots of lower body dings over the last few years.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
28,196
Mills can shoot, but he's basically a mature version of PP. isn't he? I doubt he makes $6 mil with someone else, but he likely can get a better role and set of teammates...
 
That seems like a heck of a trade for Atlanta
Co-sign!
Can the smart people explain this to me for Atlanta? Are they going to convince Trae to give the ball up? DM needs the rock.
The Hawks had become pretty predictable - cf. the Heat playoff series - with only one real ballhandler (Trae) on the court. Multiple options, and being able to split Murray and Trae on occasions between the 1st and 2nd units, is always a good thing. Plus, Murray's defense will greatly complement Trae's lack thereof.

No guarantees, and the price in future draft picks is substantial, but I'm in the "Can't believe we got 'em" camp at the moment.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,052
Mills can shoot, but he's basically a mature version of PP. isn't he? I doubt he makes $6 mil with someone else, but he likely can get a better role and set of teammates...
I would guess he's just signing back with the Nets for slightly more money
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,536
The more I look at the Murray trade the less I like it for ATL, barring a major overhaul elsewhere.

Murray is at his best with the ball... Trae never gives the ball up. I don't love the fit. Beyond that, they just traded the bulk of their assets (just Collins left really) for a guy I don't think makes them real contenders. After this deal you'd say the Hawks are what... the 6th best roster in the East?
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
28,196
Yeah, I see that Atlanta deal as a more expensive version of the Vuc deal for the Bulls. You get better, and you're interesting, but you need to really have everything break right to be a legit contender.

In Atlanta's case, I kind of get it as they've been in the middle for a while and this does give them some hope---you envision Trae accepting an off-ball role, defense improving with Collins out (for something useful, you'd think) and Murray/Hunter playing more, and maybe? But overall, it feels like a reach.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,534
Way less money next season, but a longer deal and it allows Philly to maybe get some help.
This is probably right. Options were probably pick up option and get a two-year extension, or opt out and get a four-year with more guaranteed but less per season.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
4,232
Yeah, I see that Atlanta deal as a more expensive version of the Vuc deal for the Bulls. You get better, and you're interesting, but you need to really have everything break right to be a legit contender.

In Atlanta's case, I kind of get it as they've been in the middle for a while and this does give them some hope---you envision Trae accepting an off-ball role, defense improving with Collins out (for something useful, you'd think) and Murray/Hunter playing more, and maybe? But overall, it feels like a reach.
I disagree with the first part of it. I’d argue Orlando gave up more and for a player who was older and had much more obvious flaws.

I think the trade is a good one for Atlanta. The lack of protection adds to the risk but I just don’t see how Atlanta could completely bottom out within the next 3 or 4 years. They’ve got enough young talent to keep them above the cellar and there will always be 1-3 teams every year out and out tanking.
The Charlotte pick isn’t that valuable and those 2 unprotected picks from Atlanta should be (at worst) in the 7-15 range. Murray is 25 years old, already very good, and should improve.

I do agree with your overall point that I don’t think this trade makes them a major title contender. But I do think they have a better chance than they would have if they didn’t make this move
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
27,045
Mark Murphy
@Murf56

3m

League source confirms report by @JakeLFischer that Celtics are interested in signing Danilo Gallinari if he is waived by San Antonio.
Bobby Marks says that Gallinari's contract is being reworked to make the deal work. The $5M in "protection" to which he refers must be the guaranteed portion of the deal; not sure while that has to be increased to make the deal work but I'm sure someone will explain soon.

Wednesday was the deadline to guarantee the $21.45M contract of Gallinari.
He had $5M in protection and the contract will be amended to increase the protection for this trade to work.

View: https://twitter.com/BobbyMarks42/status/1542259869507588102
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
28,196
I disagree with the first part of it. I’d argue Orlando gave up more and for a player who was older and had much more obvious flaws.

I think the trade is a good one for Atlanta. The lack of protection adds to the risk but I just don’t see how Atlanta could completely bottom out within the next 3 or 4 years. They’ve got enough young talent to keep them above the cellar and there will always be 1-3 teams every year out and out tanking.
The Charlotte pick isn’t that valuable and those 2 unprotected picks from Atlanta should be (at worst) in the 7-15 range. Murray is 25 years old, already very good, and should improve.

I do agree with your overall point that I don’t think this trade makes them a major title contender. But I do think they have a better chance than they would have if they didn’t make this move
Fair; I do think Atlanta has a very interesting set of players with this move. But it is also a very big bet on some guys stepping up and that core gelling. That said, I am not sure the better move for them given where they are---they have the problem of having a bunch of interesting but not great assets the Celtics had a couple years ago; they already gave Reddish away and are looking to move Collins. A consolidation trade makes sense, it is just that this is a pick deal not a player deal
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
8,070
around the way
People here seem pretty sanguine about the Hawks giving up 2 unprotected 1sts and an unprotected swap for Murray, given how apoplectic they were about a better Celtics team giving up a top-1 swap for White.
It's a GFIN move for sure. Short term, helps a lot obviously. Murray is very good. But long-term, could be painful. I love Murray, and they really really need a guy like him, but damn. Ballsy move.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,536
I disagree with the first part of it. I’d argue Orlando gave up more and for a player who was older and had much more obvious flaws.

I think the trade is a good one for Atlanta. The lack of protection adds to the risk but I just don’t see how Atlanta could completely bottom out within the next 3 or 4 years. They’ve got enough young talent to keep them above the cellar and there will always be 1-3 teams every year out and out tanking.
The Charlotte pick isn’t that valuable and those 2 unprotected picks from Atlanta should be (at worst) in the 7-15 range. Murray is 25 years old, already very good, and should improve.

I do agree with your overall point that I don’t think this trade makes them a major title contender. But I do think they have a better chance than they would have if they didn’t make this move
There's a reason teams top 3 or top 1 protect picks, who knows where your lottery pick ends up.

Edit- In the last 4 drafts there have been 7 teams in that 7-15 range who jumped into the top 4, including a #1 and a #2 pick. Stretching it to 5 years (and the old worse odds for low teams) adds another #2 pick.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
591
The more I look at the Murray trade the less I like it for ATL, barring a major overhaul elsewhere.

Murray is at his best with the ball... Trae never gives the ball up. I don't love the fit. Beyond that, they just traded the bulk of their assets (just Collins left really) for a guy I don't think makes them real contenders. After this deal you'd say the Hawks are what... the 6th best roster in the East?
Agree with all of this except the fit part. If Trae just reduces his ball dominance to Curry levels down from Luka levels, they should be good. Plus the Hawks' offense has cratered in non-Trae minutes. That should now be a thing of the past.

Really surprised the picks are totally unprotected. Unless you are acquiring an All-NBA caliber player (AD/Harden) or the missing piece to a title team (Holiday), the picks should have some top end protection. If nothing else, you need to guard against a season ending injury to Trae or him demanding out. 5 years is an eternity in the modern NBA.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
5,177
Agree with all of this except the fit part. If Trae just reduces his ball dominance to Curry levels down from Luka levels, they should be good. Plus the Hawks' offense has cratered in non-Trae minutes. That should now be a thing of the past.

Really surprised the picks are totally unprotected. Unless you are acquiring an All-NBA caliber player (AD/Harden) or the missing piece to a title team (Holiday), the picks should have some top end protection. If nothing else, you need to guard against a season ending injury to Trae or him demanding out. 5 years is an eternity in the modern NBA.
What is Trae without the ball in his hands?
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
5,187
Imaginationland
What is Trae without the ball in his hands?
A much better shooter? He shot .382 from 3 overall, improving to .481 on catch and shoot 3s. It's pretty great for him that he led the league in total points and assists (and turnovers, but oh well), but there could be something more here, and Atlanta needs to unlock it if they want to be a title contender. I can't be the only one to see that Steph Curry's greatness (and gravity) is unlocked when he's able to play off ball and think that the same could be possible for Young.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,988
Garden City
They added a quality starter to their lineup at a key position under cost control without giving up a future asset. I don’t understand how this is considered a bad thing. Nothing earth shattering from a Knicks view but with what was available to them in the FA market that’s a solid get imo.
Right. I think this thread is maybe overthinking how the org and fans are viewing Brunson. If/when they sign him, it's a high quality player that makes the team better. They didn't clear the deck only for Brunson, they cleared the deck because they had to. There's the makings of a core if a couple players step up but it's the NBA, they don't need much more to compete for a 6-8 seed.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,988
Garden City
They did give up assets though.

Assuming they don’t make another trade they will have traded the 11th pick for a 2025 pick likely in the mid to late 20’s (Milwaukee), a pick from the Wizards (top 14 protected in 2023, top 12 protected, then top 8 protected before it turns into 2nd round picks) and a pick from the Pistons that more than likely won’t convey until 2025 or 2026 (protected top 18 next 2 years, then top 13).

Without including any of the actual players they traded, they gave up the equivalent of a late 1st to sign Brunson for a contract that is definitely market value.
I think this kind of summarizes my view on it well. And I think those draft moves happen with or without Brunson.

View: https://twitter.com/yc/status/1542205086381785088?s=20&t=Ep22j3HcSIDXemGhFzbHOQ
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,536
I think this kind of summarizes my view on it well. And I think those draft moves happen with or without Brunson.

View: https://twitter.com/yc/status/1542205086381785088?s=20&t=Ep22j3HcSIDXemGhFzbHOQ
Beyond shorting what they gave up (conventiently avoiding trading out of 11 for example), that's not a good way to think about things, because it makes an absolutely stupid assumption that your options were to do nothing or to make this one move, as opposed to the plethora of paths you could take.

Bad teams consistently make the mistake of saying "well what we have isn't working, and there isn't a great option available, so let's commit to the okay. The Knicks literally just did the same thing with Julius Randle and Evan Fournier, and they're trying to get off both already. Listen, maybe Brunson will continue to improve and it's a great move, but it is a big commitment to a non-star.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,988
Garden City
Beyond shorting what they gave up (conventiently avoiding trading out of 11 for example), that's not a good way to think about things, because it makes an absolutely stupid assumption that your options were to do nothing or to make this one move, as opposed to the plethora of paths you could take.

Bad teams consistently make the mistake of saying "well what we have isn't working, and there isn't a great option available, so let's commit to the okay. The Knicks literally just did the same thing with Julius Randle and Evan Fournier, and they're trying to get off both already. Listen, maybe Brunson will continue to improve and it's a great move, but it is a big commitment to a non-star.
They traded out of 11 but did get 3 firsts, if my accounting is right here. Yes, the goal was get rid of Kemba, but it wasn't just a complete dump. And what are the other options for the Knicks besides Brunson? Murray cost an arm and a leg. Brunson is the top PG on the market. He fits the roster like a glove.

I don't know what the plethora of options you're referencing actually are. Tank for some picks? It sounds like they went super hard after Ivey and whiffed. The Knicks are clearly bad at this but I think Brunson is a very justified move for this team.

From The Athletic https://theathletic.com/3389300/2022/06/29/knicks-free-agency-jalen-brunson-trades-pistons/
The Knicks sought out a point guard from the moment the offseason began. For most of last season, the position belonged to either Walker, who had lost his quickness, or Burks, a natural wing. By no coincidence, the attack often appeared disorganized. The Knicks were slow getting into their sets. No squad dished fewer assists. That wasn’t going to happen for a second consecutive season. And clearly, the team wasn’t ready to hand the reins over to 22-year-old spark plug Immanuel Quickley, a bench scorer during his first two seasons.

Brunson is the top point guard on the market, and it’s not like there are big names on valuable contracts that people around the league anticipate will get traded this summer. The Pacers could move Malcolm Brogdon, but he has a long injury history, has $68 million over three years remaining on his contract and would take assets to acquire. The Timberwolves could part with D’Angelo Russell, but he’s on a max. But the Knicks wouldn’t have to give up anything for Brunson, at all.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,536
They traded out of 11 but did get 3 firsts, if my accounting is right here. Yes, the goal was get rid of Kemba, but it wasn't just a complete dump. And what are the other options for the Knicks besides Brunson? Murray cost an arm and a leg. Brunson is the top PG on the market. He fits the roster like a glove.

I don't know what the plethora of options you're referencing actually are. Tank for some picks? It sounds like they went super hard after Ivey and whiffed. The Knicks are clearly bad at this but I think Brunson is a very justified move for this team.

From The Athletic https://theathletic.com/3389300/2022/06/29/knicks-free-agency-jalen-brunson-trades-pistons/
Brunson's acceptable, but.... The Knicks stink, the Knicks will continue to stink. Honestly they should be making the opposite of these moves, they should be Detroit, trying to eat bad contracts for picks (of course harder for them because they have bad contracts). The point is... why is a team that isn't a playoff team paying assets to dump players to open cap to sign a good but nothing special PG because "well he's the best one available" It's the same thing they always do, the buy guys on overpays because "he was the best guy we could get" then the team still isn't good, and a year or two later they are trying to clear out the guys they got to overpay the next "best available non-All Star".
You don't need to sign FAs every year, sometimes when you make a mistake it's better to eat it for a year than pay to move on. Next year they could have had a massive number of expirings and all their picks and either 11 or better future picks from trading it, they'd be ideally situated for any player available by trade. Instead they made a move to win 3-5 more games, still finish in the 9-11 range and have no flexibility.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,144
Honolulu HI
(c) Sign with the Celtics for the MLE
Is it possible for Beal to sign and trade now? I mean, if he signed with the wizards with a base contract of 17 million could they flip that to the Cs (in exchange for a pick presumably) and gave him slot into the TPE? It’s a lot better than the MLE and the Cs could give him a long-term deal based on a base of 17 million (for some security) that can include an opt-out after the first year. Obviously, he’d have to really want to play for the Cs, but if he did and this is actually possible, it’s not a bad option..
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
591
Is it possible for Beal to sign and trade now? I mean, if he signed with the wizards with a base contract of 17 million could they flip that to the Cs (in exchange for a pick presumably) and gave him slot into the TPE? It’s a lot better than the MLE and the Cs could give him a long-term deal based on a base of 17 million (for some security) that can include an opt-out after the first year. Obviously, he’d have to really want to play for the Cs, but if he did and this is actually possible, it’s not a bad option..
The CBA does not allow mid-term opt-outs like you see in baseball. An ETO or Player Option can only be in the final year of the deal. Beal would also be giving up around 150M in this scenario. By all reports he's going to sign for the max, get his bag and figure it out later.
If he is actually interested in playing on a contender this seems like a poor strategy because the trade market for a 31 year old Beal at 45-50M a year may be bit more tepid than he imagines (though in 23-24 Philly will have a 40M expiring in Harris) . But folks value different things. The comfort of familiarity and being the face of the franchise appear to mean a lot to Beal.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
28,196

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
42,544
Miles Bridges arrested early this AM in LA on a domestic violence charge.

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/267636/Miles-Bridges-Arrested-On-Domestic-Violence-Charge

Details still emerging so hard to know impact or broader context. I am always a bit hesitant to rely on something sourced ultimately to TMZ, though this has been picked up by several other publications. We'll see....both on the underlying incident and the impact on RFA for him.
The market should tell us if teams think this is real. My guess is it won’t dissuade most of his suitors but he’s a guy that should go quickly once FA starts so will be interesting to see it play out.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
48,341
The Sixers saving some cash with Harden is likely going to net them PJ Tucker

 

CreightonGubanich

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 13, 2006
1,270
north shore, MA
I love the Murray trade for Atlanta. I think Murray was the best player available, a sort of All-Star version of Marcus Smart. I think he's perfect to pair with Trae. I get the concerns. But if they're going to build a team around Trae Young, they need to play differently. They need to unlock the most efficient version of him in order for him to be a truly valuable player, because he's so bad defensively. That means getting him off the ball at times, getting him easier shots, and pairing him with someone who can defend both backcourt positions. The status quo, where Trae dominates the ball and takes low efficiency shots because the entire defense knows exactly what's coming, wasn't working. Players like Murray are rare. I like that they went all in to get him, as opposed to doubling down and going after Bradley Beal.

The Brunson thing, I don't get for the Knicks. Sure, one way of looking at it is that they didn't give up any real assets and they added a quality player. I think that's misguided. It's not the players they're losing, it's the cap space. Who's competing to give Jalen Brunson $110M? Where does RJ, Randle and Brunson get you? How valuable is an undersized point guard who doesn't play defense in this NBA? It's the same concept as giving Bradley Beal the supermax: you turn a pretty good player into a negative asset the moment that contract is signed.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
4,232
I think this kind of summarizes my view on it well. And I think those draft moves happen with or without Brunson.

View: https://twitter.com/yc/status/1542205086381785088?s=20&t=Ep22j3HcSIDXemGhFzbHOQ
You can argue whether it’s worth it for Brunson or not but they did give up assets to clear space.

And there’s literally no way they would have done this series of moves if not for Brunson (or to open up cape space for another FA). Trading the 11th pick for 3 picks likely in the 20s (and with no idea when they convey) isn’t smart business
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,536
Lol, so yesterday Brunson's people had Chris Haynes leak that they were taking meetings with the Mavs, Knicks and Heat...you know, because the Knicks totally didn't tamper, and he hasn't decided so how could the details of the contract he accepted leak, if he's taking meetings?

Today:
View: https://twitter.com/ByTimReynolds/status/1542523687018139648


Ooops Heat never had a meeting scheduled.

Honestly this might be another rare tampering win for a team.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,052
Note that it looks like San Antonio is starting a full rebuild, my first call today would be to them and I’m not hanging up until they trade me a forward.

Start with another team USA member in Keldon Johnson. How serious is your rebuild? Will you move him too?

if no, how about Doug McDermott? You definitely don’t need him.

if no, fine send me back Josh Richardson. I’m not hanging up till you give me one of them.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
16,735
Somewhere
Start with another team USA member in Keldon Johnson. How serious is your rebuild? Will you move him too?

if no, how about Doug McDermott? You definitely don’t need him.

if no, fine send me back Josh Richardson. I’m not hanging up till you give me one of them.
Johnson is part of the rebuild, right? I think McDermott and Richardson are obviously available. Not sure that the Celtics would want the former (injury prone, terrible season last year) without a ton of assets attached. Richardson is probably value neutral and knows the system, so he's worth inquiring after.

Another guy that is unlikely to be available but worth asking after is Poetl. I think San Antonio tries to retain him, though.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
8,070
around the way
Lol, so yesterday Brunson's people had Chris Haynes leak that they were taking meetings with the Mavs, Knicks and Heat...you know, because the Knicks totally didn't tamper, and he hasn't decided so how could the details of the contract he accepted leak, if he's taking meetings?

Today:
View: https://twitter.com/ByTimReynolds/status/1542523687018139648


Ooops Heat never had a meeting scheduled.

Honestly this might be another rare tampering win for a team.
Yeah my boy told me yesterday that there were tweets about Miami getting into "the Jalen Brunson sweepstakes". He said "what world do we live in where pursuit of Jalen Brunson involves the word 'sweepstakes'".

It's always funny when agent posturing is this transparent.