POR - PHX

Well ok, it's 5am and I haven't slept all night, so obviously I have more thoughts. I'd like to paint three scenarios, and wonder what other people think my reaction should be in all three. (I'll even propose my reactions in all three, but I want you to tell me if you'd rather have it another way.)


Scenario 1

Joni, having wiped the floor with every other GM in most trades for a better half of a decade, declares he is trading two seconds from the rebuilding to draft and give a long-term contract to an undrafted 21yo on a two-way contract IRL.

Reaction: "you're batshit crazy but sure, go get them with Fred VanVleet 2.0"


Scenario 2

A newcomer told not to try trades during their first 2-3 weeks ignores this instruction and gets two 2nds from a struggling franchise for their own 47th pick in a weak draft.

Reaction: "you seem to be a wizard at this, I'm so lucky to have you on board"


Scenario 3

A newcomer told not to try trades during their first 2-3 weeks ignores this instruction and spends two 2nds from their struggling franchise to draft and give a long-term contract to an undrafted 21yo on a two-way contract IRL. Why? Let's analyze. In public, they mention (A) "fun", (B) "he probably doesn't work out, but how many second round picks do", (C) "My best player is 147 years old though so trying to shake it up a bit". In private, we've only spoken twice, but (and forgive me for sharing) you mentioned (D) "how do I get these old farts/bloated contracts on the trade block", (E) "Looking for young talent or draft picks back. Can take on expiring bad contracts to match as long as actual assets are included", and finally (F) "The previous owner gave Keon Johnson $36m".

My analysis:
Re (A) - as you're painfully experiencing right now, you've come to the wrong place for that. I'm more of a Kawhi-type fun guy.
Re (B) - dangerous argument. Should we then perhaps forget the 1sts too, coz y'know, Kwame Brown?
Re (C)+(E) - sounds like a team that needs to hoard future picks and definitely not lose their own.
Re (D)+(F) - it's fantastic you're curious to learn all of this ASAP, but sounds like you still haven't had the time to profoundly analyze our two trade blocks (one for shoutouts and another for a long-term overview), dig deep into the CBA to study how free agent cap hold increases considerably for those on rookie scale having their team option declined, or click yourselves through the jungle of links to locate your own team sheet from the 2023-24 season. With this in mind, how can I be sure you have carefully assessed all the intricate possibilities of receiving a pick in the 50s for virtually nothing, or immediately signing an undrafted player to an MPE+ contract once the Moratorium finishes, or proposing your-own two-way contracts, or - if all of this fails because Dylan in a stroke of genius took Trey at 47 - trading for him a bit later while offering much less than two promising future 2nds?

Thus reaction = this entire mess, for which I do apologize to both the league as a whole and to Ryan in particular, who frankly sounds like an awesome dude and a passionate GM we're lucky to have found. That being said, we have the "no trades during their first 2-3 weeks" instruction in place for two reasons: to give a new GM enough time to familiarize themselves with everything before taking any decisions that might shape their future, and to protect the league as a whole from countless recruits who joined yesterday, hurt a franchise today, then disappear tomorrow - and in particular their view on future draft picks.

And yes, I am painfully aware of the risk I'm taking when I invite people to come study boring legal documents with us but god forbid have any fun at first.

So this is becoming a more abstract philosophical discussion. Should this instruction be in place? Should it be abolished?

Seems exactly right.

as an "instruction" sure keep it but agree with Jim it doesn't really work in the last couple days of June/first week of July. If it is a rule I'd be against it

OK, so there is no rule set in concrete--that makes a difference. In this case all we are arguing about is a mid 2nd rd pick this year being traded for a 2nd rd pick in 3 yrs and a 2nd rd pick in 4 yrs. The likelihood of any of the 3 players involved being impactful is up there with me winning Lotto (and I don't gamble).

Maybe we need to have a hard and fast rule, set in concrete, that new players are unable to participate in trades until they have been in the League for a specific period--eg. 14 or 21 days, with the rule taking effect from now. The - trade should be allowed to go through, as it's pretty much a meaningless trade that has already been made.