(12-18-2019, 07:02 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: I thought the Gallinari idea in the other thread made some sense
I don't know that this trade is too far off tbh.
I think Gallinari's value is a young player, expiring and a 2nd. A recent analogue would be the Barnes trade which involved Jackson + expiring. Gallo is worth slightly more than Barnes, but not much. He can walk next year.
Turner's value is clearly higher, a young player, an expiring and a 1st. A comparable would be the Porzingis deal which was a young player + expiring + two 1st. Turner is very good, but he's not a Zinger-level All-Star.
Gallo + Mavs 2025 1st --> Pacers
Lee + Jackson + GSW 2nd (via Mavs) --> Thunder
Turner + Sampson --> Mavs
In this scenario the Mavs are essentially selling a young player + expiring + high 2nd + 1st for Turner.
The Pacers get a better fitting veteran starter to go compete in the East.
The Thunder get some value from Gallo and backfill the lineup with a young scorer.
I think the structure of this deal is defendable. Where some might argue is whether or not the Thunder want to do a deal now, or wait. They can get the 8th seed with the team they have. Similarly, I watched the Pacers last night and wonder if the whole "Turner doesn't fit with Sabonis" concept is overblown. They looks fine together if you ask me. Indiana may not want or need an upgrade. Last, while the structure makes some sense, the underlying assets from the Mavs aren't the best. Is Jackson the best "young player" the Thunder can get? Is the 2025 1st enough for Indiana? Probably not.