Spurs would say no. Pretty sure Topic will be there, and pretty sure they want to pair him with Wemby. I doubt they'd risk missing out on him.
That feels unlikely to me, but perhaps I'm just down on Ant's value. I think Ivey+5 for Ant would be a freaking steal (especially given the salary savings).
What’s your salary match, Fournier? league year doesn’t start until 7/1, Pistons would have to pick up his TO before draft night. I think I’d rather flip Ant for future draft capital vs further investing in a bad draft. Ivey needs lots of development time before the extension question; might be hard to swing with lots of scoot/sharpe minutes.
I think people are bored of Ant and his fit and want his salary to magically disappear and replace him with someone with new car smell. can you imagine 3 lottery picks in this draft? woof.
I'm all for trading Ant. But a salary dump for a pick that clearly adds nothing to assist in our future team build is foolish.
I could be convinced that someone in the lottery is going to be really good. But I don’t really see it—and I’ve watched a lot of tape on these guys. the one caveat here is that it could just be that the market for ant sucks. anyway, this trade idea doesn’t pass the smell test. Sure would be nice if you could execute lopsided, new league year trades on draft night, though.
The claim that a 5 pick in this draft "clearly adds nothing to assist in our future team build" seems a bit presumptive. However, one might argue that we've seen enough from Ant that that could be reasonably said about him.
Nearly every mock has guys like Sheppard/Dilli/Topic around 5. These are guys we most likely would not touch regardless of where we ended in the lotto. It's why I asked my previous question: who are we getting at 5 that won't be available at 7? And is that worth giving up our best player for?
If this draft is truly devoid of players that can contribute, I’m sure teams might think this is the draft to trade those picks and take a known commodity like Ant, Brigdon or Grant. But maybe not.
Then (unless this is the worst draft in history) that should happen without hesitation. I'm not sure we can, though.
Are you saying Ant is worth more than #5? I don't think so. Fans on this board are on two extremes; Either build up Ants value like he's a borderline allstar that will get a haul Or saying he's so worthless and a negative to the team we should dump him just for luxury tax savings.
Now if someone is saying Ant and #7 sent out for #5 I agree thats not worth it. I guess if we project #5 to be a star maybe you do the deal but this type of trade seems like very bad use of our meager assets.
Any young team like Detroit who is above us in the lottery would just take Reed (or Knech) instead of trading additional value to get Ant. IMO if you want to trade Ant you need to look at teams behind us in the draft.
You can make this point without the lecture about general forum opinions. And yes, I see Ant at his contract as higher value than the #5 pick in this draft.
