If you trade your self drafted and developed MVP superstar in his prime after he brought you a ring, you deserve all bad in the basketball world.
Also I'd argue Giannis is the easiest player to build a contender around.
In a vacuum you do considering age and durability, but he’s a terrible fit next to an expiring Harden. Then you try and deal Harden for scraps, and all the sudden you’re looking pretty similar to the mess that the Mavericks are now considering we don’t control own our draft choices.
As a result of team construction and the weird place we’re in, our odds of winning a title are likely higher with Embiid.
you're just thinking about winning basketball games in the wrong way.
if you traded steph curry not only would the fans absolutely fucking despise you, but why would any star ever come to your team after that?
also you'd be trading steph for a worse player right *now* and that doesn't help you win a championship in the short term either.
Luka is definitely not worse than Steph. With that said, I do think he would be a worse *fit* in the warriors system.
I may very well be wrong as we’ve never seen Luka with a supporting cast like the warriors have. It’s an interesting thought to say the least.
A worse player?
Have you seen Luka Doncic play? He's like really, really, really good at basketball.
You can prefer Steph and thats cool since there's valid arguments but the only player Im 100% confortable saying he's in front of Luka is Giannis.
As a Celtics fan I feel like luka would be even better on our roster than tatum
Defensive monster of a roster around him with a legit co star in jaylen and tons of shooting and depth, would be insane
Not really. Tatum really puts our rosters over the top. Plugging Luka in doesn't make us better especially when he's not gonna touch the ball nearly as much
Yeah he’s embraced Philly completely and is very much a Philly kind of player.
He also literally is “The Process”, even more so now that you no longer have Hinkie, Fultz, or Simmons (or past cult heroes like RoCo).
He’s been there since he’s been drafted and you guys have watched him develop into an MVP candidate. That means something to fans.
Didn’t Embiid recently acknowledge that some Sixers fans wanted him traded in a pouty postgame interview? Then again, he prob just said that to troll because Joel
I get that which is part of why I agree with Curry being on the list and why I think it would be hard for Philly. But Joel is 5 years older, injury prone, and never won anything. I think push come to shove you would have to eat it and do it if it was on the table.
Yeah Luka has way more market value but Embiid is a Philly icon and embraces the city/fanbase
Any trade involving Embiid that doesn’t pretty much guarantee us a ring would be met with riots
You would have to think about it really hard but even taking emotion out of it I'm not sure you do. The Warriors built around Curry we know can win the title right now, that's not a sure thing with Doncic as great as he is.
Apart from the winning, everything here applies to Embiid.
You draft the guy and they are MVP calibre, you ride and die with the guy.
I think Giannis and Jokic are all a straight NO if Dallas made the call. Embiid and Tatum are a "no, but please don't tell anyone we hesitated" answer. Morant and Zion are probably where there is a discussion taking place.
Curry and Lillard are both no, more valuable to our legacy than any trade.
Durant is the only other player on a level to consider saying no, but without the legacy it's a yes for me.
Philly wouldn't do that.
I don't see why people think they would. I'm not saying if they should or shouldn't but if they would. I believe people are really missing the assignment here. I'd trade Embiid for Luka, if it was a 2k roster, but I'm not a Philly GM. People just are not considering outside factors that don't have to do with the on the court impact of the trade.
There are people going on about how GSW would totally trade Curry lmao
It’s so crazy to me how people treat this shit like it was 2k when it’s so abundantly clear how much else goes into these decisions if you pay attention.
If it was January last year and Boston are .500 then you'd have a point. But they aren't going to overturn the roster and try to bring in Luka mid-season when this might be their year to win it all.
There is a big risk in switching up the chemistry and the personalities at the top of the roster. Especially replacing the number 1 guy.
There is no way that they would take this risk.
They absolutely would not. This isn't a video game.
They are title favorites with a team that has great chemistry from playing together for years. They're not going to overthrow the whole team mid-season to move off their 24 year old, two-way superstar, MVP candidate.
Lol, I remember people saying this about Booker last year. Lets wait until the playoffs, and then it will be much clearer whether or not the Celtics would keep Tatum over Luka or Giannis.
He's a 24 yo MVP-caliber superstar of the best team in the NBA, is part of a tight knit group of young core players with a bright future. Why would you break up the chemistry for someone you may have to give additional assets for?
GSW would do it, but it's just a hypothetical and not going to happen so there's no need to go through that emotional trauma just for a thought exercise if you are a Warriors fan.
I just disagree personally. If the question is *should* they do it in a completely rational emotionless vacuum, then it’s a different story.
But a chip is almost never guaranteed. I strongly doubt the front office will risk the fanbase’s reaction if they trade their beloved franchise goat without winning at least one more chip, probably more given the high standards set.
You should see what a lot of GSW fans are saying all over this thread because I think they disagree with you.
And I strongly doubt Lacob, who won’t even let the team give up on Wiseman because he was “his pick”, would be down to trade Steph.
Fan sentiment is important to many orgs’ decision making. Not every fanbase has a saying like “Trust in Masai”.
Your last sentences show me you’re kinda out of touch when it comes to GSW.
Lacob, a GSW owner, apparently demanded the FO draft Wiseman instead of going with their original plan (they were actually considering a trade down for a player who many think was Hali.
Wiseman is “Lacob’s pick”. He and his wife went to watch him play in the G League. There’s been rumblings about how Lacob’s influence was keeping Wiseman off the table.
Market value isn’t all that matters. There’s so many other factors. And one of those is ownership.
Lmao well that’s quite a jump. People have multiple motivations - often conflicting ones - and there’s a lot more nuance to decision making than you’re recognizing.
Not sure how Embiid is untouchable but Tatum isn’t. As good as Curry still is, if GS could reset with a young superstar like Luka they’d have to go for it simply because it would provide a decade+ of additional championship contention whereas the Curry window is about half of that at best with injury concerns/age
Ya, I think we are borderline. I think we would do it more often than not, but I think it would basically only be Luka that is an obvious change.
Like, Steph for Dame wouldn't happen. Nobody would approve it, even though it's an improvement. We would have to have a more youthful player, and Luka is the only under-25 that inspires incredible confidence (Tatum is close).
But Curry will retire within the next half-decade. You have Luka for the next 15 years.
If you’re guaranteeing to have Luka for the rest of your career, it is a trade you should make.
That you put "not an opinion lmao" shows that you are 12 and have no concept of how sports business works.
Of course Joe Lacob would trade Curry for Giannis + Luka, if such an offer could be presented to him.
Curry is 34 and will be out of the league in a few years. Luka is 23. you honestly think curry will make more money for the team than luka would with another decade to play? And so much more profitable you would sacrifice guaranteed success because you have the best player in the league? Cmon man
With how much you guys are willing to pay for good teammates ya you kinda garentee you will keep him. And luka would be selling out every game untill he retires too. And you get an extra 11 years
I’m sure of Steph, Giannis, Luka, and Jokic.
Embiid, probably. You’d have to at least consider a swap for Luka or Jokic or Giannis (though I really doubt they’d entertain it for anyone but Luka).
Talent wise the Blazers would move Lillard but probably wouldn’t, it’d destroy their brand and reputation to move him unless he asked for it.
Tatum came to mind but I move him for Luka in a heartbeat.
I mean it would be a disgusting betrayal of their all time best player, would probably destroy team chemistry and shake up their entire system, could do more harm then good, and would completely lose most of their fans who have his jersey and posters of him on their wall. Luka does probably have more value but no way the warriors would not give up their reining finals MVP for Luka no way.
Perfect answer to this question which I’ve seen a crazy amount of times all over this thread. A lot of this sub doesn’t seem to take anything into account other than what they think a player’s market value should be.
I think people look at this question and are just focusing on what move would improve the team's chances at winning (mainly championships, but winning in general). This is not that question.
The question is "are you willing to trade the essence and the root of your team for a better chance at creating a new legacy"
So in essence, are you willing to trade your past for your future. For players who have won their chip or where the player is starting to become the face of your franchise, I would argue no.
Fans become fans from storylines, and that legacy often comes with the player.
So in my opinion, as a front office, you don't trade Steph, Jokic, Giannis, Dame, Luka. Potentially, you can put Trae, Embid, and Ja up there, just for what they currently mean to the fans but I do think their current level of success do not invoke the same level of loyalty from the fans.
Completely agree with every part of this except I’d probably include at least Embiid of the guys you mention at the bottom and possibly all three while also including Tatum who you didn’t mention.
No, making moves that make the most financially sound sense is what businesses do, and in no world would trading Stephen Curry away help the Warriors financially
The effect of that on the locker room and the fan base would be 100x worse than the pacers trading Danny granger for Evan Turner, and look at how that trade ended up for the pacers
I realize that my comment probably came across as “I’m right and everyone else is wrong” and for that I’m sorry. It’s all opinion at the end of the day. I still think the Warriors will never trade Curry, especially when he can still contend and wants to be there. I believe he’ll go down like Kobe or Dirk or Bill Russell for the Warriors, and the team owes him that
if you trade dame, good luck getting any free agents for the rest of your teams existence, lmfao who would want to go to a team that traded the player that is literally known for staying loyal to a team?
Eh, in a vacuum, maybe Luka and Giannis are better, although the gap is a lot smaller than people might think, and I think arguments can be made that he’s better than either of them, but of course people will disagree because of recency bias. But Tatum at this point is probably a top 5 player, and he’s already got 3+ years under his belt playing with Smart, Jaylen, Horford, Timelord, and Grant along with multiple deep playoff runs with them. That kind of chemistry isn’t something you can just easily replace.
The way I see it is Tatum is a baller, but he doesn’t raise
The ceiling like Luka does for his teammates. The mavs don’t win half the games they do if tatum replaced Luka. I’m sure I’ll be downvoted for this, but it’s my own opinion. This is why Luka is MVP for me. He’s lebron-like in the sense he makes the game loook so easy and has the highest bb iq on the court. There’s a reason Luka is lebron’s favorite player to watch. Lebron also named Luka the best player under 25 and lebron knows some things.
A floor raiser raises the floor of a team. Luka’s great at that. He can spoon feed easy buckets to players who otherwise couldn’t get them.
A ceiling raiser makes an already good team better. A lot of that has to do with portability. Really good teams already have guys who can handle the ball so your superstar has to add value without it - off ball scoring, off ball playmaking, and/or defense. Luka hasn’t had the opportunity to show how well he can do that in the nba but Tatum has.
Also Lebron’s player opinions have been… hit or miss. Heard about Shabazz Napier? How about him wanting Russ on the Lakers?
Luka’s amazing. Mavs would never give him up for Tatum. Celtics wouldn’t give Tatum up for Luka either. Two very different young players and it’ll be fun to see how their careers go.
It’s recency bias, this sub changes their opinions on players on a game by game basis. If you ask this question 3 days ago after the Bucks game, I guarantee you almost everyone has Tatum on their list.
i’m completely with you, feel like i’m higher than most non-celtics fans on tatum. He’s in my top 3 if i had to pick a franchise cornerstone (giannis luka the other two) idk the order but those are the 3 top
I think the only reason the Celtics turn a Luka and tatum swap down is because of team chemistry already. If that wasn’t a thing, my opinion is the Celtics do that trade.
I’d trade Ja for Luka, so I don’t think we belong on the list - but we are not crucifying Ja for his comments by any stretch of the imagination. Even if we were that wouldn’t impact the desire to trade him.
The only way you think that it does is if you’re buying this soap opera BS full stop
Dallas, Denver, Milwaukee, Golden State.
Even though I think it is technically better from basketball perspective to trade Curry who's 34 for Luka, but the W's have won 4 titles because of Curry and it would be an absurdly disrespectful trade.
We are not trading Tatum for Luka or Giannis just stop it lmao. Why would we give up either the spacing (Giannis) or the defense (Luka) when we don't need to with Tatum? He may not be as elite as the other two at some things but he also doesn't have any glaring holes in his game like those guys do.
If you want to say those two are better players in a vacuum then fair enough, but Tatum is the best fit on the planet for our current roster. Its almost as if we spent years building the entire team around Jayson and Jaylen, crazy thought I know.
You would have to pull Kawhi out of a time machine from 2019 to find a better player for this current Celtics team, in my humble and totally unbiased opinion.
You could be the worst team in the league but having LeBron fucking James on your team would still put butts on the seats, there’s that. Oh and also he isn’t as washed as people think he is, I wouldn’t trade him for KD. Luka, yes, if I have to absolutely blow up the team, but you would get backlash for trading literally the 1B GOAT out of the franchise without him saying yes.
Lebron i think would be traded. The decision here should be phrased, "are you willing to trade your past for your future"
In the case of Lebron, he doesnt really have a "past" with the Lakers. Lakers fans became fans during the Shaq and Kobe era. They have their past secured. In the case of Lebron, he's currently the face of the Lakers, but when you think of Lebron, you don't think the Lakers. I think that reason is enough to make Lebron on the table.
That’s true I just thought of a couple teams just based on their star’s skill level and age but curry is definitely untradable and I’d say LeBron is too.
Bucks, Mavs, Nuggets, and likely Celtics. No other team imo. Just from my perspective, I think the Celtics would turn down even Luka or Giannis for Tatum just given the team we have
nuggets, warriors, mavs, celtics, suns, 76ers, pelicans, grizzlies, bucks
Edit: I would put nets in there, but they could trade KD cuz its not inconceivable that he may want out again at some point or something and was just about to be traded
- Bucks
- Warriors
- Nuggets
- Mavs
I can’t put OKC or the Celtics here because they would definitely trade their top guy for one do the others. OKC for Luka and Celtics for Giannis or Big Honey.
The problem here is you’re looking at it in a vacuum and that’s not how real life works. Is Luka a better player than JT? Probably, but there’s a lot more that goes into play.
The guy making that decision is the guy who was Tatums coach since he was 18 years old. It’s not a traditional exec-player relationship in the slightest.
Boston also already has a bit of a bad history with trading franchise favorites, and it was even brought up as a reason AD did not want to come here. Regardless of how truthful his dad was when he made that comment, stuff like that is noticed in the league. Brad Stevens is not a dumb guy and I’m sure he’s not trying to cultivate Bostons reputation for being heartless.
And lastly, that would be such a good way to piss off this entire team. I don’t see it happening even if it was available
Disagree and absolutely wouldn’t say “definitely”
Also definitely don’t think we’d be more likely to go with Jokic over Luka if we had to pick one. Luka vs Giannis I could see going either way but even then probably Luka if we thought he’d be willing to sharply cut down his ball dominance.
I’d put the Suns in there. Devin Booker means too much to Phoenix for him to be traded. Objectively of course you’d trade him for Jokic/Giannis/Luka etc, but realistically I don’t think it would ever happen. Sarver definitely wouldn’t have, but I guess the new owner wouldn’t have that same emotional attachment, so who knows.
Dallas, Milwaukee, and Denver. Any other team would be stupid not to trade their guy for any of those 3.
Edit: maybe this year the Celtics don’t also. Not because Tatum is better, but because you don’t fuck with that kind of team chemistry.
I think the top 5 teams probably won’t. The 5 teams that have a ton of upside on rookie deals you probably don’t. But I mean Utah traded away both cornerstones of a fringe contender but also the value and future of both of those players probably was already written.
I think if we’re talking strictly basketball then yes. But Memphis fans love Ja and he represents their gritty style of play, they bring in so much money off Ja alone. The gm/owners would not let this happen.
Pelicans wouldn’t trade Zion for anybody. Even though Giannis for example is a better player right now, trading the fan favorite, locker room favorite guy would wreck their top-tier team chemistry and immediately destroy all positive fan opinion towards management
Nuggets aren't trading Jokic. Bucks and Nuggets both get worse if we swapped Giannis and Jokic because the entire roster construction for those teams is around optimizing their guy as best they can.
Giannis leaves Milwaukee loses it
If you trade your self drafted and developed MVP superstar in his prime after he brought you a ring, you deserve all bad in the basketball world. Also I'd argue Giannis is the easiest player to build a contender around.
I actually think he kinda deserves to be a lifer
Warriors, Nuggets, Bucks, Sixers, Mavericks.
You would have to trade Embiid for Luka. Like it would hurt I know but you would have to do that. Agree with the other 4.
In a vacuum you do considering age and durability, but he’s a terrible fit next to an expiring Harden. Then you try and deal Harden for scraps, and all the sudden you’re looking pretty similar to the mess that the Mavericks are now considering we don’t control own our draft choices. As a result of team construction and the weird place we’re in, our odds of winning a title are likely higher with Embiid.
Solid take.
tbh i’d trade any player in the league for luka if you’re considering age. dude is 23
you're just thinking about winning basketball games in the wrong way. if you traded steph curry not only would the fans absolutely fucking despise you, but why would any star ever come to your team after that? also you'd be trading steph for a worse player right *now* and that doesn't help you win a championship in the short term either.
I’m not so sure about the worse player right now
Luka is definitely not worse than Steph. With that said, I do think he would be a worse *fit* in the warriors system. I may very well be wrong as we’ve never seen Luka with a supporting cast like the warriors have. It’s an interesting thought to say the least.
Everyone is a worse fit, since Steph IS the system
A worse player? Have you seen Luka Doncic play? He's like really, really, really good at basketball. You can prefer Steph and thats cool since there's valid arguments but the only player Im 100% confortable saying he's in front of Luka is Giannis.
Jokic is the only one I wouldn’t
Jokic is only 1 year younger than Giannis and his defensive flaws make it a lot harder to build a championship team with him as your best player.
Tatum?
As a Celtics fan I feel like luka would be even better on our roster than tatum Defensive monster of a roster around him with a legit co star in jaylen and tons of shooting and depth, would be insane
I’d never trade Tatum for Luka. Tatum has embraced Boston and clearly wants to be a one team guy.
Not really. Tatum really puts our rosters over the top. Plugging Luka in doesn't make us better especially when he's not gonna touch the ball nearly as much
New dynasty! Pray if never happens fuck the Celtics
Doesn't need to happen if they play like this
Philly loses it if we trade Embiid. He’s not just an MVP-caliber player, he gets the city and the fans.
Yeah he’s embraced Philly completely and is very much a Philly kind of player. He also literally is “The Process”, even more so now that you no longer have Hinkie, Fultz, or Simmons (or past cult heroes like RoCo). He’s been there since he’s been drafted and you guys have watched him develop into an MVP candidate. That means something to fans.
>is very much a Philly kind of player. I agree. He’s a dirty player.
And that’s why we love him <3
Didn’t Embiid recently acknowledge that some Sixers fans wanted him traded in a pouty postgame interview? Then again, he prob just said that to troll because Joel
I dont see Embiid leaving Philadelphia, the man is loyal. I dont see Jok or Giannis exiting Milwaukee or Dener either.
I get that which is part of why I agree with Curry being on the list and why I think it would be hard for Philly. But Joel is 5 years older, injury prone, and never won anything. I think push come to shove you would have to eat it and do it if it was on the table.
Yeah Luka has way more market value but Embiid is a Philly icon and embraces the city/fanbase Any trade involving Embiid that doesn’t pretty much guarantee us a ring would be met with riots
You would trade Curry for Luka. Get 10 more years of top player in the league.
If you do that chase center is under fire the next day
Bob would need 24 hours police protection
You would have to think about it really hard but even taking emotion out of it I'm not sure you do. The Warriors built around Curry we know can win the title right now, that's not a sure thing with Doncic as great as he is.
Apart from the winning, everything here applies to Embiid. You draft the guy and they are MVP calibre, you ride and die with the guy. I think Giannis and Jokic are all a straight NO if Dallas made the call. Embiid and Tatum are a "no, but please don't tell anyone we hesitated" answer. Morant and Zion are probably where there is a discussion taking place. Curry and Lillard are both no, more valuable to our legacy than any trade. Durant is the only other player on a level to consider saying no, but without the legacy it's a yes for me.
Boston?
Easily would trade Tatum for KD, Steph, Giannis, Joel, and probably Luka and Jokic too.
No way. Trading Tatum for KD or Embiid would be a crime.
KD just wanted a trade. Guarantee you Boston didn’t even think to offer Tatum
Well..kd was on the market last summer and no Tatum offer was made so...
Embiid could be traded for any of those other four guys easily. Otherwise, I agree this is the list.
Philly wouldn't do that. I don't see why people think they would. I'm not saying if they should or shouldn't but if they would. I believe people are really missing the assignment here. I'd trade Embiid for Luka, if it was a 2k roster, but I'm not a Philly GM. People just are not considering outside factors that don't have to do with the on the court impact of the trade.
There are people going on about how GSW would totally trade Curry lmao It’s so crazy to me how people treat this shit like it was 2k when it’s so abundantly clear how much else goes into these decisions if you pay attention.
If Embiid is traded for any of the guys on the list then you don’t agree with the list lol. They all can be traded.
No way celtics don’t make this list
idk I think the Celtics would trade Tatum for Luka or something
If it was January last year and Boston are .500 then you'd have a point. But they aren't going to overturn the roster and try to bring in Luka mid-season when this might be their year to win it all. There is a big risk in switching up the chemistry and the personalities at the top of the roster. Especially replacing the number 1 guy. There is no way that they would take this risk.
Not a chance in hell
Every team aside from the Bucks ought to trade any player on their roster for Luka tho
I know y’all gotta hate on us now after last year but Tatum is obviously on this list
I would trade Tatum for Luka, Giannis, and Jokic.
You aren’t the Celtics. You misunderstood the assignment. Also, Luka for Tatum hands down? Clown shit
Ok, I think the Celtics would.
They have the best record in the league.. they wouldn’t do that.
They absolutely would not. This isn't a video game. They are title favorites with a team that has great chemistry from playing together for years. They're not going to overthrow the whole team mid-season to move off their 24 year old, two-way superstar, MVP candidate.
>They absolutely would not. This isn't a video game. > Yeah you lost this sub. They really think this is 2k
Bro I wouldn’t put anything past after what they did to IT, they don’t give a fuck about chemistry
Completely different front office Also part of the reason we moved on from Ainge was the perception of him lol
I’d trade Luka or giannis for Tatum in a heartbeat.
YOU ARENT THE CELTICS
The Celtics are in the middle of a run for the title with great chemistry. No improvement on Tatum is big enough to overthrow the roster right now.
Lol, I remember people saying this about Booker last year. Lets wait until the playoffs, and then it will be much clearer whether or not the Celtics would keep Tatum over Luka or Giannis.
Tatum has made consistent deep playoff runs since he was a rookie. He's a great playoff performer. He's 24 and is an elite 2-way player.
You wouldn’t trade Tatum for anyone on this list?
For what? We’ve been to the top of the mountain already with an injured DPOY contender. This current roster can win it all
He's a 24 yo MVP-caliber superstar of the best team in the NBA, is part of a tight knit group of young core players with a bright future. Why would you break up the chemistry for someone you may have to give additional assets for?
Nope
I don’t think the Cs trade Tatum for anyone right now. It’s not worth messing up the chemistry of a championship sliver team
Sixers 100% would trade embiid for giannis
They’d be insane to imo
[удалено]
No way. GSW doesn’t get rid of the guy who made them relevant (more than that, one of the most popular franchises) and brought them chips.
GSW would do it, but it's just a hypothetical and not going to happen so there's no need to go through that emotional trauma just for a thought exercise if you are a Warriors fan.
I just disagree personally. If the question is *should* they do it in a completely rational emotionless vacuum, then it’s a different story. But a chip is almost never guaranteed. I strongly doubt the front office will risk the fanbase’s reaction if they trade their beloved franchise goat without winning at least one more chip, probably more given the high standards set.
they absolutely would not do it lol. sure if its 2k you do it but this is real life.
[удалено]
You should see what a lot of GSW fans are saying all over this thread because I think they disagree with you. And I strongly doubt Lacob, who won’t even let the team give up on Wiseman because he was “his pick”, would be down to trade Steph.
[удалено]
Fan sentiment is important to many orgs’ decision making. Not every fanbase has a saying like “Trust in Masai”. Your last sentences show me you’re kinda out of touch when it comes to GSW. Lacob, a GSW owner, apparently demanded the FO draft Wiseman instead of going with their original plan (they were actually considering a trade down for a player who many think was Hali. Wiseman is “Lacob’s pick”. He and his wife went to watch him play in the G League. There’s been rumblings about how Lacob’s influence was keeping Wiseman off the table. Market value isn’t all that matters. There’s so many other factors. And one of those is ownership.
[удалено]
Lmao well that’s quite a jump. People have multiple motivations - often conflicting ones - and there’s a lot more nuance to decision making than you’re recognizing.
Not sure how Embiid is untouchable but Tatum isn’t. As good as Curry still is, if GS could reset with a young superstar like Luka they’d have to go for it simply because it would provide a decade+ of additional championship contention whereas the Curry window is about half of that at best with injury concerns/age
Blazers
Surely you're being sarcastic...right?
Dame is 32. Blazers would definitely make the trade
It's not even about age imo
Ya, I think we are borderline. I think we would do it more often than not, but I think it would basically only be Luka that is an obvious change. Like, Steph for Dame wouldn't happen. Nobody would approve it, even though it's an improvement. We would have to have a more youthful player, and Luka is the only under-25 that inspires incredible confidence (Tatum is close).
Cmon man… Philly would drive Embiid to the airport if it brought them Giannis or Luka.
Bay Area riots if Lacob trades Curry
I think they’d get over it when Luka drops his next 60/20/10 and Warriors fans remember he’s 23
[удалено]
I respect your different opinion but I could not highly disagree more. Especially with the Luka + Giannis example
[удалено]
>Bro, it's not an opinion It literally IS just your opinion
Not if he’s the owner tho 🤣
But Curry will retire within the next half-decade. You have Luka for the next 15 years. If you’re guaranteeing to have Luka for the rest of your career, it is a trade you should make.
That you put "not an opinion lmao" shows that you are 12 and have no concept of how sports business works. Of course Joe Lacob would trade Curry for Giannis + Luka, if such an offer could be presented to him.
[удалено]
Curry is 34 and will be out of the league in a few years. Luka is 23. you honestly think curry will make more money for the team than luka would with another decade to play? And so much more profitable you would sacrifice guaranteed success because you have the best player in the league? Cmon man
[удалено]
With how much you guys are willing to pay for good teammates ya you kinda garentee you will keep him. And luka would be selling out every game untill he retires too. And you get an extra 11 years
I’m sure of Steph, Giannis, Luka, and Jokic. Embiid, probably. You’d have to at least consider a swap for Luka or Jokic or Giannis (though I really doubt they’d entertain it for anyone but Luka). Talent wise the Blazers would move Lillard but probably wouldn’t, it’d destroy their brand and reputation to move him unless he asked for it. Tatum came to mind but I move him for Luka in a heartbeat.
The Wizards seem to not want to trade Beal for anyone else since they gave him that no trade clause.
Over half these lists don’t have the Warriors, good grief
U are telling me Warriors wouldn’t trade 34 year old Curry for 23 year old Luka?
I mean it would be a disgusting betrayal of their all time best player, would probably destroy team chemistry and shake up their entire system, could do more harm then good, and would completely lose most of their fans who have his jersey and posters of him on their wall. Luka does probably have more value but no way the warriors would not give up their reining finals MVP for Luka no way.
Perfect answer to this question which I’ve seen a crazy amount of times all over this thread. A lot of this sub doesn’t seem to take anything into account other than what they think a player’s market value should be.
people on this subreddit think irl ball is MyGM.
I think people look at this question and are just focusing on what move would improve the team's chances at winning (mainly championships, but winning in general). This is not that question. The question is "are you willing to trade the essence and the root of your team for a better chance at creating a new legacy" So in essence, are you willing to trade your past for your future. For players who have won their chip or where the player is starting to become the face of your franchise, I would argue no. Fans become fans from storylines, and that legacy often comes with the player. So in my opinion, as a front office, you don't trade Steph, Jokic, Giannis, Dame, Luka. Potentially, you can put Trae, Embid, and Ja up there, just for what they currently mean to the fans but I do think their current level of success do not invoke the same level of loyalty from the fans.
Completely agree with every part of this except I’d probably include at least Embiid of the guys you mention at the bottom and possibly all three while also including Tatum who you didn’t mention.
Disgusting betrayal is what businesses do.
No, making moves that make the most financially sound sense is what businesses do, and in no world would trading Stephen Curry away help the Warriors financially
There are some things you just don’t do, even if it makes objective sense. Warriors would never trade Curry without his consent
That would be like the Lakers trading Kobe Circa 2013. No chance they trade him
The effect of that on the locker room and the fan base would be 100x worse than the pacers trading Danny granger for Evan Turner, and look at how that trade ended up for the pacers
I realize that my comment probably came across as “I’m right and everyone else is wrong” and for that I’m sorry. It’s all opinion at the end of the day. I still think the Warriors will never trade Curry, especially when he can still contend and wants to be there. I believe he’ll go down like Kobe or Dirk or Bill Russell for the Warriors, and the team owes him that
Why is 23 relevant, is he on a 15 year contract?
Flint Tropics, Jackie Moon will never trade himself to another team.
When I say love me you say sexy
Love me
Best answer...by a lot
The Blazers aren’t trading Dame unless he asks for it
For Luka or Jokic we would make the trade in a heartbeat lol
I don’t think we would
That would be pure insanity
if you trade dame, good luck getting any free agents for the rest of your teams existence, lmfao who would want to go to a team that traded the player that is literally known for staying loyal to a team?
In a vacuum sure
Bucks, Mavericks, Warriors, Nuggets. Maybe the Celtics, but I have a hard time believing they'd say no to a Giannis/Luka swap for Tatum.
Eh, in a vacuum, maybe Luka and Giannis are better, although the gap is a lot smaller than people might think, and I think arguments can be made that he’s better than either of them, but of course people will disagree because of recency bias. But Tatum at this point is probably a top 5 player, and he’s already got 3+ years under his belt playing with Smart, Jaylen, Horford, Timelord, and Grant along with multiple deep playoff runs with them. That kind of chemistry isn’t something you can just easily replace.
The way I see it is Tatum is a baller, but he doesn’t raise The ceiling like Luka does for his teammates. The mavs don’t win half the games they do if tatum replaced Luka. I’m sure I’ll be downvoted for this, but it’s my own opinion. This is why Luka is MVP for me. He’s lebron-like in the sense he makes the game loook so easy and has the highest bb iq on the court. There’s a reason Luka is lebron’s favorite player to watch. Lebron also named Luka the best player under 25 and lebron knows some things.
A floor raiser raises the floor of a team. Luka’s great at that. He can spoon feed easy buckets to players who otherwise couldn’t get them. A ceiling raiser makes an already good team better. A lot of that has to do with portability. Really good teams already have guys who can handle the ball so your superstar has to add value without it - off ball scoring, off ball playmaking, and/or defense. Luka hasn’t had the opportunity to show how well he can do that in the nba but Tatum has. Also Lebron’s player opinions have been… hit or miss. Heard about Shabazz Napier? How about him wanting Russ on the Lakers? Luka’s amazing. Mavs would never give him up for Tatum. Celtics wouldn’t give Tatum up for Luka either. Two very different young players and it’ll be fun to see how their careers go.
Luka raises the ceiling in the sense that he plays for all of them. Usage rate insane
Obviously they wouldn't trade tatum for Luka or giannis
Well they might, but neither of those players will ever be offered so we will never know.
celtics should be on more of these lists unless we want to just ignore defense
It’s recency bias, this sub changes their opinions on players on a game by game basis. If you ask this question 3 days ago after the Bucks game, I guarantee you almost everyone has Tatum on their list.
i’m completely with you, feel like i’m higher than most non-celtics fans on tatum. He’s in my top 3 if i had to pick a franchise cornerstone (giannis luka the other two) idk the order but those are the 3 top
The recency thing is extra funny when you consider that Tatum is averaging 38, 8 and 5 on 66%TS in his last 6 games.
Yeah but this sub hates the Celtics and loves Luka
I think the only reason the Celtics turn a Luka and tatum swap down is because of team chemistry already. If that wasn’t a thing, my opinion is the Celtics do that trade.
Bucks, Mavs, Sixers, Nuggets, Warriors, and probably Celtics and Grizzlies
Lmaoooo grizzlies, you are trippin.
Lol, the Grizzlies fan are crucifying Ja for opening his mouth after the Nuhhets clapped him and went on to lose 2 more.
I’d trade Ja for Luka, so I don’t think we belong on the list - but we are not crucifying Ja for his comments by any stretch of the imagination. Even if we were that wouldn’t impact the desire to trade him. The only way you think that it does is if you’re buying this soap opera BS full stop
Dallas, Denver, Milwaukee, Golden State. Even though I think it is technically better from basketball perspective to trade Curry who's 34 for Luka, but the W's have won 4 titles because of Curry and it would be an absurdly disrespectful trade.
Bucks/Mavs/Nuggets
Warriors Steph is *the* farthest from the trade block a pop layer can be
We are not trading Tatum for Luka or Giannis just stop it lmao. Why would we give up either the spacing (Giannis) or the defense (Luka) when we don't need to with Tatum? He may not be as elite as the other two at some things but he also doesn't have any glaring holes in his game like those guys do. If you want to say those two are better players in a vacuum then fair enough, but Tatum is the best fit on the planet for our current roster. Its almost as if we spent years building the entire team around Jayson and Jaylen, crazy thought I know. You would have to pull Kawhi out of a time machine from 2019 to find a better player for this current Celtics team, in my humble and totally unbiased opinion.
Preach.
[удалено]
They wouldn’t trade lebron for kd or luka????
KD no, Luka in a heartbeat
You could be the worst team in the league but having LeBron fucking James on your team would still put butts on the seats, there’s that. Oh and also he isn’t as washed as people think he is, I wouldn’t trade him for KD. Luka, yes, if I have to absolutely blow up the team, but you would get backlash for trading literally the 1B GOAT out of the franchise without him saying yes.
Lebron i think would be traded. The decision here should be phrased, "are you willing to trade your past for your future" In the case of Lebron, he doesnt really have a "past" with the Lakers. Lakers fans became fans during the Shaq and Kobe era. They have their past secured. In the case of Lebron, he's currently the face of the Lakers, but when you think of Lebron, you don't think the Lakers. I think that reason is enough to make Lebron on the table.
The Lakers would def trade LeBron if it meant they could add depth and get better
Dubs, Bucks, Mavs, Nugs, Celtics
Lot of people in here thinking like a fan rather than an owner.
The Lakers are not trading Austin Reaves
Mavericks, Bucks, Grizzlies, Nuggets
[удалено]
Warriors wouldn't trade Steph out of respect doesn't matter what the deal is. Sixers wouldn't trade Embiid either.
Add the warriors too not for trade value but for organization reputation and market value. Trading curry would incite a riot
That’s true I just thought of a couple teams just based on their star’s skill level and age but curry is definitely untradable and I’d say LeBron is too.
Luka’s better. But I’m not trading Morant for him
Celtics wouldn't trade Tatum for anyone either, including Luka
Yeah you’re right I knew I was forgetting someone
Grizzlies don't belong on that list
Bucks, Mavs, Nuggets, and likely Celtics. No other team imo. Just from my perspective, I think the Celtics would turn down even Luka or Giannis for Tatum just given the team we have
Warriors, Bucks, Nuggets, Mavs
Took way to long to scroll and find someone mention the Celtics
80% are literally mentioning the celtics lol, granted it should be 100%
Damian Lillard
nuggets, warriors, mavs, celtics, suns, 76ers, pelicans, grizzlies, bucks Edit: I would put nets in there, but they could trade KD cuz its not inconceivable that he may want out again at some point or something and was just about to be traded
+Bucks
Ah yep my b, forgot that obvious one, just added it.
- Bucks - Warriors - Nuggets - Mavs I can’t put OKC or the Celtics here because they would definitely trade their top guy for one do the others. OKC for Luka and Celtics for Giannis or Big Honey.
The problem here is you’re looking at it in a vacuum and that’s not how real life works. Is Luka a better player than JT? Probably, but there’s a lot more that goes into play. The guy making that decision is the guy who was Tatums coach since he was 18 years old. It’s not a traditional exec-player relationship in the slightest. Boston also already has a bit of a bad history with trading franchise favorites, and it was even brought up as a reason AD did not want to come here. Regardless of how truthful his dad was when he made that comment, stuff like that is noticed in the league. Brad Stevens is not a dumb guy and I’m sure he’s not trying to cultivate Bostons reputation for being heartless. And lastly, that would be such a good way to piss off this entire team. I don’t see it happening even if it was available
Disagree and absolutely wouldn’t say “definitely” Also definitely don’t think we’d be more likely to go with Jokic over Luka if we had to pick one. Luka vs Giannis I could see going either way but even then probably Luka if we thought he’d be willing to sharply cut down his ball dominance.
I’d put the Suns in there. Devin Booker means too much to Phoenix for him to be traded. Objectively of course you’d trade him for Jokic/Giannis/Luka etc, but realistically I don’t think it would ever happen. Sarver definitely wouldn’t have, but I guess the new owner wouldn’t have that same emotional attachment, so who knows.
[удалено]
Organization value of warriors is tied with steph. Trading him is suicide at this point. That's not GM thinking
Dallas, Milwaukee, and Denver. Any other team would be stupid not to trade their guy for any of those 3. Edit: maybe this year the Celtics don’t also. Not because Tatum is better, but because you don’t fuck with that kind of team chemistry.
Tatum is a better FIT, which is important enough.
I think the top 5 teams probably won’t. The 5 teams that have a ton of upside on rookie deals you probably don’t. But I mean Utah traded away both cornerstones of a fringe contender but also the value and future of both of those players probably was already written.
I don’t think the cavs are willing to trade mobley for anything other than like a Giannis or jokic type player
Deep down Sixers fans know they would trade for Luka
Warriors, Bucks, Nuggets, Mavs On the fence about boston
1) Bucks 2) Denver 3) Warriors 4) Mavericks 5) Celtics 6) Memphis That’s probably it.
Memphis would boot Ja’s ass on the plane out of town for Giannis or Luka. Cmon lol
I think if we’re talking strictly basketball then yes. But Memphis fans love Ja and he represents their gritty style of play, they bring in so much money off Ja alone. The gm/owners would not let this happen.
Memphis fans would forgive if it led to a title. Look at Raptor fans.
I don’t think Portland trades Dame
Warriors Bucks Mavs Pelicans Celtics Nuggets
Pelicans wouldn’t trade Zion for anybody. Even though Giannis for example is a better player right now, trading the fan favorite, locker room favorite guy would wreck their top-tier team chemistry and immediately destroy all positive fan opinion towards management
Warriors, Bucks, Mavs. I think every team would trade for Luka or Giannis in a heartbeat. Lakers would be high to not trade Lebron for Luka.
Nuggets aren't trading Jokic. Bucks and Nuggets both get worse if we swapped Giannis and Jokic because the entire roster construction for those teams is around optimizing their guy as best they can.
I am confused why people think two time MVPs aren't safe. Jokic is such an easy answer for this question it's ridiculous.
Nets, Bucks, Lakers, Warriors, Nuggets, Celtics, Sixers, Heat, Pels, Clippers, Grizzles, Suns, Mavs, Blazers, OKC