If the season ended today, our draft pick

[Spud2nique]

Would land at 19. 

 

2017: 19th pick: John Collins

2018: 19th pick: Kevin Huerter

2021: 19th pick: ? 

 

Hoping it goes to 20 or 21 though because that would mean we passed the Knicks, depending how other teams as well. Lakers are in the 20th spot, NY is in the 21st.
 

 

[Gray Mule]

Hawks are not needing a great draft pick to pull them up out of the mirey ground of the lottery.  Rather, we can hope for a great pick to ensure a more successful future.

Still want our draft pick but now, for an entirely different reason!!

[TheNorthCydeRises]

8 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

Would land at 19. 

 

2017: 19th pick: John Collins

2018: 19th pick: Kevin Huerter

2021: 19th pick: ? 

 

Hoping it goes to 20 or 21 though because that would mean we passed the Knicks, depending how other teams as well. Lakers are in the 20th spot, NY is in the 21st.
 

 

 

 

[sturt]

What I would rather see is for us to successfully shop our 2021 first for a 2022 first with a team that plausibly should be drafting in the same range (or better) then.

Why?

1a) Because how likely is it that a #19-ish pick is going to get much PT next season regardless?

Answer: It's just not. We're not in that phase of roster development any more. Our assessment has to include that in the decision like it hasn't for quite awhile.

1b) Because by postponing that pick, the clock on that new player's contract naturally starts in 2022.

Thus, two sides of the same coin, the pick is that much better invested since you theoretically and plausibly could have more of a role for that player at his lower cost at a point when we can less afford adding MLE guys.

Put concisely, it's economics... thinking about our potential tax situation earlier instead of later.

 

2) Because conceivably, having two picks in the next draft allows the distinct possibility of moving up in that draft to gain a higher quality player.

Why not?

1) It's a gamble on your trading partner's not getting really good at the worst possible time, and you could lose... that is, presuming that you don't craft so that it has both a floor and a ceiling in terms of how good or bad it falls. But could you remedy that by confining it to, say, #15-#25 for 2022, and then if unfulfilled, widening to #10-#30 for 2023? Maybe.

Who reasonably might be the prime candidates?

I start with the list of teams that don't have a pick as-is for 2021, but do for 2022. I eliminate those teams that seem to be in a good position for 2022. And I really only see one.

Chicago.

Portland is a maybe, mainly b/c they seem to be stuck on the hamster wheel, but less attractive.

Is it just a straight-up trade, or would other assets be involved?

Would depend on the range of limitation on where that 2022 pick gets conveyed. It might also depend on Schlenk's interest in some of the lower-cost assets on CHI's roster that may conceivably play a productive role for us in the 2021-22 season.

=============

Edit: Bulls fan points out that the Septien rule is a problem to a straight-up trade b/c they also owe ORL their 2023 pick.

True, and that obviously would necessarily add a layer of complexity to the deal that ends the conversation before it starts. But, of course, there are other approaches that could be taken if both sides were motivated.

Could, for instance, say that instead of ATL receiving CHI's 2022 1st outright, it's their 2025 pick with less protection.

Or, could look at draft slot flipping as an option, so maybe that for the next two drafts in which CHI has a pick, ostensibly 2022 and 2024.

Or, perhaps there's a current roster asset that could be included, that in combination with the above and with slot protections acceptable to both sides, would work.

For our part, I just think it helps our cause to convert an asset that won't likely be of that much use to our first genuine NBA Finals assault in decades for some asset(s) that are more likely to be... whether that's in the form of a role player, or more likely, the opportunity to enhance a future draft or drafts.

For CHI's part, I have to think they thought they would be better than they are, and that they're going to be open to a discussion that would restore to them a 2021 first round asset.

[Final_quest]

If we hit on the #19 pick, there is a financial benefit to our cap situation.  You can move on from someone like Gallinari or Lou Williams more easily.  Just let those contracts expire and you are reloaded.  

I think a decision to trade depends on the who falls in the draft and what teams are willing to trade.  No reason to decide right now with certainty if we should trade or make the selection.  If we get someone who will make Nikola Jokic level impact, make the pick.  

[Thomas]

Yeah, am thinking a good bit depends on how Knight develops at PF or is expected to after Gallo is gone or leading up to it. 00 is already established as the rotation center. SF just needs healthy bodies moving forward cause we have the guys. SG is handily covered. Some improvement at backup point moving forward might be the target. Like BG but you know we could get better there. So I keep the pick and go from there do believe with thoughts mostly on PG and possibly a big. 

[sturt]

PMd you @Thomas

[Spud2nique]

On 5/7/2021 at 9:51 PM, Spud2nique said:

Would land at 19. 

 

2017: 19th pick: John Collins

2018: 19th pick: Kevin Huerter

2021: 19th pick: ? 

 

Hoping it goes to 20 or 21 though because that would mean we passed the Knicks, depending how other teams as well. Lakers are in the 20th spot, NY is in the 21st.
 

 

When do we flip it?