BY HENRY ABBOTT and DAVID THORPE

During a recent TrueHoop content meeting, things got a bit heated between Henry and David as they debated several facets of the current trade season, including Jimmy Butler, the impending financial shackles hindering most of the league’s teams, and how some teams—namely the Raptors and Sixers—might rebuild using what “the Shai plan.”
While defining “the Shai plan” might have revealed a rift in our ranks, it also generated one of the most entertaining discussions in TrueHoop history.
DAVID:
I’ve been thinking a lot about the trade season. The biggest story feels like how limited teams are. It’s more than “Who wants Jimmy Butler?” It’s hard just trying to make trades work. I’ve been working on trade machines for days running into dead ends.
HENRY:
As I was saying on Monday’s TrueHoop podcast, cap space has never been more valuable. Twenty-five GMs told their owners: Now’s the time to spend up to and beyond the cap. And all 25 of them were totally fucking wrong, right? Giant mistake. What could you do right now with cap space? How wrong is pick-a-rebuilding-team? They could get unbelievable players.
Here’s my other thing: If the Grizzlies can put together a package for Jimmy Butler, they can put a package together for anyone. Why stop at Jimmy Butler? Why not get someone younger? Almost every team wants to ditch salary anyway.
So, if you have cap space, who would you get?
DAVID:
Who’s available? It’d be great to go get all sorts of guys, but for most teams it’s not going to happen. It’s going to be hard to get the guys who are really good and have good contracts. For the same reasons, Henry, why would teams trade away the good contract?
HENRY:
Because of the market forces right now, I think there’s probably 20 owners who are like: We’re not getting revenue sharing. We’re not winning a championship. We’re not collecting revenue sharing. Plus, we’re paying tax. Fix it.
DAVID:
You’re saying trade guys that are making real money. That’s not the same as a guy on a rookie deal. You have to have an owner that’s willing to take on those contracts.
HENRY:
I’m saying the very few teams that can take salary get to be extremely choosy. There might be 15 teams with GMs in danger of being fired if they don’t drop salary; they’re gonna trade who they can trade. The few teams that can take on salary will get to drive the hardest bargain in the history of cap space. I don’t know who they will get, but it’s gonna be way better than three years ago.
DAVID:
Maybe if they’re willing to take on an expiring contract, realizing they may lose him for nothing in the offseason—for instance, trading picks and expiring contracts for Brandon Ingram, knowing you won’t re-sign him because you can’t afford him in the offseason. So you’re risking the one year (well, half a season now), and you have to give up a pick or two to get him. The value’s going way down because of that. What are you willing to give up now for a guy you don’t think you can re-sign?
HENRY:
Losing players is getting better, though, right? A couple years ago, I learned from a respected economist with NBA ties that a luxury tax bomb is about to go off in the NBA. It’s happening. That’s where, if you’re the Heat, you’d rather have no one than Jimmy Butler.
DAVID:
I agree. What I’m saying is: Who’s taking those guys? And what guys are we speaking of?
HENRY:
The Thunder got [Alex] Caruso in part because they were willing to pay a salary. Four years ago, every team could say, “I have $10 million for you, Alex” but almost no one can say that now because the CBA simply won’t allow many teams to take on an additional $10 million. That means, if you have $10 million in cap room without getting into the tax—and 20 owners are terrified of the tax—you’re not taking an expiring contract for your $10 million. You’re going to take a really fucking good player, right?
DAVID:
Yeah, but who’s trading that $10 million?
HENRY:
The GMs who are getting fired if they don’t drop $10 million in salaries want to trade that guy. That’s exactly what I’m saying. That’s why the Bulls got rid of Caruso, right? So they wouldn’t have to pay his extension? More than ever, really good players are going to be available. The market’s shifting that way. Because there’s a bunch of teams wanting to ditch salary. Too many.
DAVID:
But you’re trying to be logical in a world where there’s not a whole lot of logical thinking right now. Hell, people think the guy most likely to be traded is Bradley Beal.
HENRY:
I just think people are narrating the way the league used to work. I mean, look what actually happened: a really good and cheap player in Caruso got traded from a team that needs to avoid luxury tax to a team with room. This is what happens, right? I think the market is actually shifting so that, if you have room, you can get really good players.
DAVID:
Yeah, there’s very few that have room. What was the Caruso deal? Josh Giddey? This is part of the issue: What are you giving up? [The Thunder] traded Giddey in part because Giddey is more expensive—and it’s a fact—than Caruso is going to be. So, OKC got the better player for less money. That’s a fucking win-win. There’s just not a lot of those situations.
HENRY:
But [the Bulls] also got a rookie contract for a veteran contract. So they kick the can down the road on luxury tax.
DAVID:
Yeah, for a year. They’re yet to give Giddey an extension. If they do, it’ll probably be in the 20s [annually], which is expensive.
HENRY:
Everything’s true that has always been true about trades. And there are 20 factors, but there’s one increasing factor: Will GMs lose their jobs if they avoid the luxury tax? That indicates a little bit of a shift.
If you run the shitty Pistons or the shitty Wizards—or even the Grizzlies, who have the creative ability to come up with deals—then you have a little more leverage. You’re talking on the phone to someone who’s like, “I just need you to also take this shitty contract while I give you a good player or a good pick,” or whatever it is, right? The value has gone up a little.
I think everything you’re saying is true, David. But we have to factor in this one other thing: When Jarod and I were talking about the Grizzlies getting Jimmy Butler with his $52.4 million player option, I was like: “Why would you get that $52 million contract? Like, why not better—and younger?”
DAVID:
Henry, I’m not arguing with you. I understand everything you’re saying. I just don’t know an example that will happen. (I could do more research. I’ve not looked that much into it on that level.) It’s just gonna be hard to do any of these deals because I know the GMs are encouraged to trade, but there’s only a few teams that can do those trades. That’s my whole point. And there’s no guarantee they will do them because they still have to give up something of value, right?
HENRY:
For instance, let me bring everything back to where it needs to go: the Blazers. They have young players who are going to need raises at some point, right? They also have Jerami Grant, Anfernee Simons, Matisse Thybulle—
DAVID:
[Deandre] Ayton.
HENRY:
And Ayton, right. They literally have to get rid of some of those players just to keep from having their shitty team go into the luxury tax, right? So they’ve been making calls, and they’re saying: Hey, you know we’d like this package for Jerami Grant. But they haven’t found what they like.
Well, guess what? I think soon (this year, next year, and the year after that) it’s going to be like: We’ll give you a pick to take Jerami.
DAVID:
Oh, I was just gonna say that they’re probably already there.
HENRY:
I am poorly qualified to make tax projections, but back-of-the-envelope math suggests about 15 teams will pay a combined half-billion dollars or more in luxury tax this year. That money will be distributed to the non-paying teams, who stand to get something like $40 million each. Teams that are right now slated to miss that payday include not-favored-to-contend teams like the 76ers, Pelicans, Clippers, Heat, Lakers, and Nuggets. It’s very costly for any of those teams to stand pat. Some will trade to win now; some will trade to end the season with that $40 million payment.
But there are very few teams they can call to drop salary in that way.
Every GM who needs to get rid of somebody has to really make a sweet offer. So, when you say, “Who’s gonna be available?” I think lots of people are available that we don’t think are available, because several teams are headed for financial disaster if they don’t ditch whoever their Jerami Grant is, right? So, to me, if I’m Grizzlies GM Zach Kleiman, I’m like: I love your idea of Jerami Grant and a first for Jake LaRavia and cap filler, but I think I can do better.
I think that’s actually where we’re headed. I don’t know who the most desperate GM is out there, but you’re going to get that guy to give the best offer—which is going to be mind blowing, right?
DAVID:
But you still gotta make the salaries work.
HENRY:
If Grizzlies can make it work for $52.4-million Jimmy, they can make it work for anyone.
DAVID:
Who are the Grizzlies trading that match that size of contract in return? What’s Marcus Smart making—and for how many more years? If a team is desperate to trade someone to get below the tax, they still gotta take equal salary. And looking down the road, you still gotta pay Marcus Smart.
To your point, it might just be that a team wants to take Smart’s money (and these other guys) because next year they’ll still be further below the tax compared to what they would have been. I completely get that part. It’s just really hard. I’ve been playing with this. It’s hard.
HENRY:
But also: this is all a sign the league is ready for expansion.
DAVID:
For sure.
HENRY:
The league is overflowing with already-signed contracts that need to find open roster spots sheltered from the tax. . Two new teams would help solve that problem.
DAVID:
I’ve been saying this for a long time. The talent level is so high; we’re ready for [expansion].
I’m really struggling to find a trade I think a team will do—and I’m considering what you’re saying, Henry. I’m considering how the trade will save teams money; it’s always been the case, it’s just a bigger case now. Over the next week, I’ll talk to some agents because they’re all working like crazy to get deals done. I just can’t remember a market like this over the last 20 years of doing this.
It all makes me think of two things: One is that it’s like “WarGames”—the best way to win the game is not to play. And the second thing is, this is stupid, but in the ’80s, rotisserie baseball was all paper and dice. During college, two of my friends were playing roti-baseball, and they were arguing whether one could have this kind of roster. My friend, TJ, kept saying, “My team is on the field! My team is on the field!”
Again, it’s personal, but if I was a GM, I might just be thinking: My team’s on the field—I ain’t doing shit. There’s nothing out there that I can do that makes us better.
HENRY:
Remember when the Heat basically got down to zero players, and that got them a championship? If someone had that going this summer, who could they get?
DAVID:
Yeah, that’s a good way to look at it. Of course, the Heat knew they already had one stud—without [Dwyane] Wade, you know, LeBron and [Chris] Bosh don’t win a championship.
Utah would be one of those teams with [Lauri] Markkanen. The Jazz have no problem trading, and they have a lot of young talent. Though Markkanen’s a guy we’re not hearing anything about this trade season—maybe he’s not 100 percent. The Thunder getting Markkanen, if he’s healthy, would be just incredible.
HENRY:
Of course, you’re right that this is really, really hard to do. But I think this year we’re going to see the absolute masterclass in what a desperate GM will do to keep his job. It’s climbing Everest, but people are going to climb Everest.
DAVID:
Henry, just to make sure I understand, you're saying that, in this masterclass scenario, it’s to save owners from the luxury tax? I’m sure there’s ways, even this year, that they could save some money. But I wonder, given how much teams are growing in terms of value—and with the likelihood of expansion-fee checks going to all 30 owners—will paying $20 million in luxury tax matter as much when they know that’s coming?
I mean, I hear they always want to save a dime. I get that they want to save money. I get that the stands are empty—
HENRY:
Even for the Clippers, right? They’re in the greatest city for basketball, and they just opened a billion-dollar stadium with fucking $180 million scoreboard. This is supposed to be a good business; this is the biggest bet. And it’s not—it’s a bad business. Watch on TV and you see empty seats in the lower bowl even against good opponents. Very bad. The national revenue is good, but organizations obsess about local revenue—and it’s all shit, right? They used to have local advertising and local broadcasting, and it’s largely gone. It’s been wiped out. Now, it’s in-arena signage and parking and beer? That’s not paying for your scoreboard.
Some owners just don’t care because they have other businesses. But if you care about the revenue—if you’re the Buss family—it’s a problem. I don’t know what they’re going to do, but there have to be some GMs who are feeling the heat to reduce the cash calls to the investors.
Climate change corresponds to 100-year changes in society, but a tsunami hit Thailand on a certain day, right? The luxury-tax tsunami is hitting right now, and what’s gonna matter is whether you can elevate your house and pour a stout foundation. The tax level automatically adjusts with the league’s revenue, so luxury tax will always be “what you can afford, plus ….”
The players will always get half the money, however much basketball revenue there is. It’s not going to be that teams have more recurring profit. They’re just going to have more obligation to spend, and the luxury tax involved will be a little more than that, right? There’ll be some teams willing to pay—some [Mat] Ishbias—but there won’t be 30 Ishbias.
I think we should just account for the fact that we’re at the beginning of a new phase, according to the economist I talked to, where the luxury tax is a much bigger concern than it used to be.
Hedo Türkoğlu signed a really bad deal with the Raptors when he was older. I got a call one day from Brian Windhorst, who was wondering who would be paying for the last two years of that shitty deal. We agreed it’d be Paul Allen. At that time, Allen, James Dolan, and a couple others were the owners who sucked at running teams and tried to win with their wallets.
There’s always a [Mikhail] Prokhorov willing to pay an idiot tax of $30-to-40 million a year in not getting revenue sharing and paying luxury tax, right? (I don’t think any of them ever won a championship doing that.) This year, the Suns have a $188 million luxury tax bill, which gets distributed.
Donald Sterling would tell you, to the penny, how much every team got for being below the tax line. But what used to be like $11 million is getting closer to $50 million today, right?
It comes for everybody eventually. Paul Allen lost his appetite for big spending. James Dolan did, too. On their own schedules, different teams will arrive at this point, but I don’t think anyone’s just going to stay in win-now mode forever—because they’re not going to win.
Spending like crazy doesn’t get you titles, but it might get you Jimmy Butler.
DAVID:
If we had a rank right now, each of us picks a player we think should be traded and should be acquired—meaning, his team should trade him and the other team should acquire him. Who would it be?
HENRY:
Being smart about salary or just thinking about basketball?
DAVID:
I come from the Henry Abbott school—I’m not going to use qualifiers. But you can qualify, because that’d be a good learning experience for us.
I’ll give an example: I mentioned Markkanen, but I don’t know that Utah is willing to do it. I’ve also written this many times. I think KD should go to his first team—well, there’s no Seattle team right now, but OKC. Durant on the Thunder would make them prohibitive favorites to win a championship. I just don’t know if they can make it work—and they’d probably lose [Isaiah] Hartenstein.
HENRY:
I don’t think the Mavericks will win a championship for reasons that are hard for me to figure out, so who would fix the Mavericks?
DAVID:
Are you saying, trade Kyrie?
HENRY:
No, I’m just trying to think.
Jarod throws out an idea: Any team wanting to rebuild should be trying to acquire Tyrese Maxey. When David asks what the Sixers will do with Joel Embiid and Paul George, Jarod says: “They get rid of them, too.”
DAVID:
That’s hard to do, right? I mean, Embiid is amazing. How do you take Embiid? I’m not arguing—I’m just saying, that wouldn’t be easy.
HENRY:
It’d have to be for another similarly compromised player—like Jimmy or Zion [Williamson].
DAVID:
It’s a good idea—and an interesting one. Of course, there would be a long line of takers for Maxey. I just don’t think Philly’s gonna think about that.
Jarod adds that Maxey would fetch the biggest return of the Sixers’ three stars.
DAVID:
Here’s the thing: Shai [Gilgeous-Alexander] has given teams the opportunity and permission to keep their young star. The problem is, they’re just not as well run as OKC, who’s really fucking well run. The Thunder do a great job of taking care of their guys.
Two years ago, I was the one saying that Shai could get miffed at some point. Well, I was wrong, and Sam [Presti] was right. Like, whatever he was saying to Shai, he’s clearly delivered. And what’s amazing is that they’re still one of the best teams in the West without Chet [Holmgren]. It’s incredible.
HENRY:
I think the Thunder are exactly the opposite lesson: They traded their Tyrese Maxey, who was Paul George, right?
DAVID:
No, no—Maxey’s like 24. George was already 29 when the Thunder traded him.
HENRY:
I understand, David. But let me tell you: Any other ascending team, which has already gone deep into the playoffs with a player as good as Paul George was at 29, isn’t trading that player. It’s unthinkable.
But the Thunder were the team that did trade that guy. Shai is what happens if the Sixers do trade Tyrese Maxey.
DAVID:
I get that, but consider the situation in Toronto. How long will Scottie Barnes be willing to wait out the Raptors’ fucking mess? The Raptors aren’t a cheap team. RJ Barrett’s making a bunch of money; so is [Immanuel] Quickley.
But guys want to be All-Stars every year. Right now, it’s hard for Barnes to be earn his second All-Star selection because the Raptors are so fucking bad. That makes it a harder sell.
I do think the Raptors might use the Sam Presti/OKC pitch to try to sell Scottie: Look what they did with SGA—give us a chance to build around you.
Long ago, that’s how things worked across the league. Then there was a period of time where players (like LeBron) were like: Fuck it, I’m out of here. I think Presti gave Shai reason to believe: We’re gonna be okay. You may not be an All-Star at first, but you’re gonna be okay.
HENRY:
That’s completely wrong!
DAVID:
How is it wrong?
HENRY:
But they didn’t get “Shai.” They got Shai and 700 picks, which made Shai have good teammates.
Basically, Scottie Barnes and Tyrese Maxey are incandescent-value players. GMs feel like they would be losing if they traded them because the value is higher than the market can fathom. I’m saying, that player is exactly who you trade—because then you get a good future team.
DAVID:
So we’re disagreeing …
HENRY:
The point is, bad teams usually keep their Scottie Barnes-type players. Utah is going to keep Markkanen until he sucks or has a bad hamstring or something—and now the whole game is over, right? But they could have gotten a shit-ton for him a year ago when he had incandescent value.
I promise you the same thing is going to happen with Tyrese Maxey. The Sixers are gonna say he’s too good to trade, and then they’ll keep him until he’s not too good to trade—and they don’t get as much. This is the Blazers with Dame [Lillard]. This is every team.
To me, the thing that Sam Presti did—and that teams aren’t emulating as they should—is to trade the player when there’s absolutely nothing wrong with him and everybody wants him. Because then you could get SGA and a bunch of young players and picks and cap space and everything else you can dream of! The Thunder are good not because they got SGA but because they got the whole fucking boat. And so, how do you get the whole boat? By trading someone whose value is off the charts. And that’s what no one is copying.
To me, keeping Scottie Barnes is exactly the opposite lesson—that’s just keeping a really good player on a shitty team without the ability to become a good team. Wrong. Teams have been doing that for 50 years! Like, what you need to do is trade someone who can get you Shai, cap room, Jalen Williams, and five more players besides.
DAVID:
Henry, when they traded for Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, he was an okay player who had been a pretty good rookie. Three years later, he was one of the best players in the league on a terrible team. And they kept him. Then they traded everybody else to build around him, agreed, but they’re squat without him. He’s the reason why they’re so special.
Okay, Tyrese Maxey. You can trade Embiid (I don’t think it’s easy). You can trade Paul George (I don’t think it’s easy). You can trade everybody else—-and they’re going to be terrible.
And then Maxey’s going to say: What the fuck? You want me to stick around here with all these young players?
And they’re gonna say: Yeah, just what Shai did at your age.
HENRY:
That’s wrong!
DAVID:
How was that wrong? Shai was an All-NBA player at 25.
HENRY:
Because, in keeping Tyrese, the Sixers wouldn’t be solving the riddle of making the Sixers good.
DAVID:
You’re saying that, after trading Embiid and George for really good young players and picks, the Sixers can’t be good in three years like OKC was?
HENRY:
No, I’m saying that the best value comes from trading Tyrese.
DAVID:
It’s absolutely possible they wouldn’t get back full value for Embiid because of all his injuries. We’re talking about MVP Embiid from two seasons ago. You’ll probably find a team who’ll see Paul George as he was a year ago instead of what he is now. I don’t know what you can get for him. Maybe he is just as good, and it’s just that the Sixers are a cesspool right now and that Nick Nurse fucking sucks.
In Toronto, Barrett is playing pretty well. Quickley has barely played due to injury, but his contract isn’t bad. The Raptors are trying to convince Scottie to stick around—they’re going to make those moves. These aren’t the players we’re going to win with. We’re going to go get a bunch of young players and picks. Just give us a chance the way Shai did in OKC.
These [Raptors] are on the bottom end of 25—like Shai was when he was an All-NBA-level player and the Thunder were garbage. They couldn’t make the playoffs. They could have traded Shai, to your example—
HENRY:
Paul George is who they traded.
DAVID:
But Shai was 20 years old.
HENRY:
Maybe you don’t understand my point.
DAVID:
I do understand your point: Shai was a young, dominant player, and the Thunder kept him.
HENRY:
The Clippers didn’t.
DAVID:
Agreed—the Clippers did not, but the Thunder did.
HENRY:
If you’re trying to rebuild with picks, those you get for your shitty, old, broken Joel Embiid don’t hold a candle to the picks you would get for your Maxey.
DAVID:
I agree with you.
HENRY:
You’re gonna be competing against Sam Presti, who did get picks for a player who was seen as absolute peak value in Paul George, right? Most GMs wouldn’t have the cojones to trade that Paul George, especially not for like, “might pan out,” because you get fired as the GM for the interim period when we’re seeing if Shai works out.
My point is, if you’re trading Joel Embiid and trying to keep up with the pick haul of Sam Presti, you’re behind 10-1 from the jump.
The way to play Sam Presti’s game isn’t to hang on to Scottie Barnes—it’s to trade him. That’s how you get the kind of pick haul that OKC got. And like, everybody thinks they’re playing Sam’s game when they keep their player, but they’re not because they don’t have the cap room and picks that pave the way to contention in the luxury tax era. The way you get those kinds of picks is by trading Scottie and trading Tyrese, which nobody else is doing.
DAVID:
Okay, I’m only saying that Maxey just turned 24 years old. He is not the same thing as Paul George. The fact that they drafted him is irrelevant. SGA, at 24, was on a terrible team.
HENRY:
My point isn’t about age. My point is about players of such incredibly high future value—
DAVID:
Like Shai was three years ago, right? Think of how many more picks [Presti] could have got for Shai when they were terrible—that’s all I’m saying. They were terrible, and they kept him.
HENRY:
But they were well positioned to become a contender, whereas the Sixers are not; the Raptors are not. So, keep Shai on a contending team, but don’t keep him on a hope-and-prayer team.
DAVID:
But that’s what the Thunder were. Jalen Williams wasn’t a top-three pick.
HENRY:
But their whole roster was affordable, with cap room. Either this guy gets good, or he’s out—right? The Sixers and the Raptors are nowhere close. They gotta get rid of all these fucking old guys to ever consider a real rebuild. In this market, with the luxury tax, they have years of cleaning up to do to get where the Thunder were three years ago.
The Thunder had SGA and whoever plays well with SGA. They’ve had maybe 60-to-70 players go through there. That is well positioned. Ajay Mitchell starts playing well? Great, he’s in. If not, he’s out.
DAVID:
Agreed, but it didn’t seem well positioned three years ago, when—
HENRY:
It did to me!
DAVID:
I thought Shai would grow frustrated with how bad they were for years, but the Thunder convinced him that they would turn everything around. And then they got lucky as hell that teams are stupid and didn’t draft J-Dub.
HENRY:
If you’re the 76ers, that isn’t a problem at all—you’re trading Tyrese, so you don’t have to convince him of anything. You have to convince the player you get for Tyrese. That’s what Sam Presti did with Shai.
I feel like this is the league’s misunderstanding of what [Presti] did. He didn’t keep his young player; he traded his big star for a million young players.
DAVID:
He traded his 29-year-old star, correct? He didn’t trade his other future star.
HENRY:
We have a bias in the NBA that there are maybe 15 players who are so good that you’d never trade them. I think that’s completely wrong. It’s only true if you’re on a path to contention. Otherwise, get that fucker out of there—because his value will keep declining while you hang on to your stupid job, instead of orienting the whole franchise to the future, which is what Presti did.
DAVID:
Yeah, you and I both agree that Shai Gilgeous-Alexander was an amazing player; I’ll just leave it at that. We’re on a very different page on this. I think [the Thunder] could have traded Shai for an incredible fortune, yet they chose to keep him when he was 23-24 years old.
HENRY:
Well, of course, they could have traded him for a lot!
DAVID:
And they didn’t; that’s all I’m saying. Like, Scottie Barnes is bitching right now about the roster—
HENRY:
He’s bitching about the roster because the Raptors are never going to win a title with him, and he knows that. It’s not what Shai had. Believing in Sam [Presti] was correct!
DAVID:
But Shai wasn’t bitching when he was 23. When he kept ascending, and the team wasn’t around him, all he had was to hope those guys would work out. You trade all the other guys Toronto has and convince Scottie to stick around with these young guys coming in. I mean J-Dub is in his third year.
HENRY:
Add air quotes around “all these young guys coming in.” With the actual pick haul, these are knowable—
DAVID:
We’re never going to see pick hauls like that again. What Sam did was incredible.
HENRY:
The argument that you’re making for Tyrese in Philadelphia—Oh, we’re doing it like the Thunder—if I were Tyrese, I would say: “Do you have the kind of incoming players that the Thunder have?”
DAVID:
You wouldn’t make the argument until after you make the trades. You got to make the trades first, and then he’s gonna be like, “What the fuck?” And that’s when you tell him. You can’t do it beforehand.
HENRY:
Here’s my point. We all agree. We can think ahead—what you get for Embiid and what you get for Paul George and what you get for whatever-the-fuck-else-poopoo-platter the Sixers have will not be anything remotely close to what a team gets if they trade an incandescent-value player. And you’re going to have to beat that team. Right now, that team is still the Thunder, but there might be other teams in the future, right?
So, to me, when you say that Scottie will look at what the Raptors say, or Tyrese will look at what the 76ers say, and he will see that he’s in seventh or eighth place in the Rebuild Olympics. He will know that, and his agent will know that. And that’s why this is not at all like Shai.
The message from Shai wasn’t to keep a young player around while you fuck around with your long-term plan, which you are inventing on the fly. Sam’s plan was 10 years of getting every single thing that helps a long-term player—from Chip Engelland to better training to the biggest draft haul in league history to [Mark] Daigneault to cap space. Everything that can make them good in the future was put in the same boat with Shai. That’s the Shai plan.
The Shai plan is not “you’re young and good, and we’re not trading you.” That’s missing the only important part of the story: They were able to get him everything they needed to win a championship. And it worked.
DAVID:
Listen, I leave you with this: You just literally made my argument. Thank you very much. That’s exactly what I’m saying. That’s what [the Raptors and Sixers] are going to sell to those guys. That would have been harder before making the trades—
HENRY:
Before?
DAVID:
We disagree. I think you just argued my point, which is: Hey, young man, give us a chance. We’re doing all this. Look at all these picks we just got.
Again, you can’t do it till after the trades. If you don’t do the trades, we’re not in any ballpark to begin with.
HENRY:
Okay, so what do you get for Embiid?
DAVID:
I don’t know. You can’t talk to Tyrese until after the deals are done. And a year from now, when they’re fucking terrible again and his agent asks what the plan is, you are able to say: We’re doing the same thing Sam [Presti] did with SGA. It doesn’t mean they’ll do it. They probably won’t.
HENRY:
I just plumb know that what you’d get for Joel is way less than what you’d get for Tyrese. So my argument is that the Shai plan is to say to the 19-or-20-year-old player that you get for Tyrese: Look, we have the league’s best bunch of young prospects and picks and cap space.
Now you’re talking like Sam Presti.
If you choose to trade Joel, then you’re saying to Tyrese: Hang on and maybe you’ll still be young and healthy when we’re next in line for the throne.
Thank you for reading TrueHoop!
Got a great email from Chris, who fried my brain a little by asking if Orlando should trade Paolo or Franz. Tough one! The question underlying it all is: are you on the path to real contention? If yes, then to me it makes sense to keep your stars. If not, then think boldly! The Magic are young and defensively elite and I'm honestly not sure how likely they are to win it all with Paolo and Franz.
At the very least, I'd want to know what you could get. My first thought is that Golden State is ready to overpay for a star who can create his own shot. It's not hard to believe some other team like the Rockets, Jazz, or Pistons would get excited too, and only good things come from overheated bidding wars.
Chris also points out that this playbook was not invented by Sam Presti. The Jazz traded away Deron Williams at the peak of his value. The 76ers traded away ascendant stars in Jrue Holiday and to a lesser extent Michael Carter-Williams.
This kind of thought provoking content is what places you folks leagues apart from other NBA coverage. Worth every penny to NBA lovers! What a great read.