Ja Morant is officially available. Jonathan Kuminga is begging to be traded. The Hornets are taking calls on LaMelo Ball. The Sacramento Kings would happily give you Zach LaVine Tuesday for a hamburger today. And of course Giannis is still casting an enormous 7-foot- shadow over the entire trade market. If you can't keep up with all the trade rumors, you're not along.
But our NBA team has your back in this week's roundtable, looking for red flags with some of the biggest names, debating whether LeBron deserves an All-Star nod, dissecting weaknesses on Eastern Conference contenders and more.
1. If you were a generic GM and had to trade for one right now, would you rather chase — Ja Morant, LaMelo Ball or Zach LaVine?
Eamon Cassels: I’m out on Morant, so it’s a toss-up between LaMelo, and LaVine for me. Ultimately, it depends on the team, and there’s a clear argument for LaVine if you’re looking for a complementary piece. In a vacuum, he'd be my pick.
Bryan Toporek: Woof. Between Morant's off-court concerns and shooting inefficiency, I'd be out on him. LaMelo is the most talented of the three, but he also might be the most unserious of the three. Since LaVine is on a slightly shorter contract than Morant and LaMelo — and might read the room well enough to know he's never sniffing a max contract again — I'd begrudgingly pick him, especially since the cost to acquire him should be the cheapest of the three.
Matt Moore: LaMelo for sure. There’s a lot of evidence that he’s a plus-impact player who basically makes a lot of dumb decisions because he doesn’t trust his teammates and thinks they are the best option. It’s not how I would rather him play, but it’s also likely if you just put him on a team where he’s not the No.1 he evolves into being a monster. A great fit would be Minnesota next to Ant. Let Ant be the guy and LaMelo be Robin and everyone wins. Julius Randle for LaMelo Ball makes a crazy amount of sense.
Ian Levy: I just did the Jim Carrey dry-heave from Dumb and Dumber. I think there are some very narrow contexts in which he could help a playoff team. I'd just hope I had been smart enough to already build that kind of roster for my generic NBA team. Also, he's only contract for one more year and I think rooting for him would cause me the least psychological trauma.
2. In retrospect, which Luka Dončić trade return was better — Trae Young and Cam Reddish for the Hawks, or Anthony Davis, Max Christie and a 2029 first-round pick to the Mavs?
Eamon Cassels: At least the Hawks had a conference finals run, right? Trading for Davis will likely result in the Mavericks flipping him for expiring contracts and an intriguing yet unproven young player. That’s an outright disaster.
Bryan Toporek: The former. The Hawks never would have done this, but imagine the haul they could have gotten for Trae had they flipped him in 2022? If Dejounte Murray was going for three first-rounders and a first-round swap back then, the Hawks might have gotten a package that rivals the Paul George/SGA swap for OKC. And at least back on the night of the 2018 draft, we weren't 100 percent certain that Luka would be a generational superstar. (Granted, it was fairly obvious to anyone who was actually paying attention to overseas ball back then.)
Matt Moore: Neither? Both equally bad? The Dallas trade was a diaster, just an abject failure in every conceivable way that is going to ruin a lot of careers. But Atlanta knew he was a Euroleague MVP. This was not hard to figure out. I think the Lakers are showing it’s not as easy to win with Luka as we think, but the Hawks still should have known better. Between Trae Young-Luka and Chris Paul-Marvin Williams, the Hawks’ draft history is a disaster zone.
Ian Levy: More dry-heaving but it was more Schmidt when he finds out Nick has been using his towel on New Girl. They were both equally bad from a product and results standpoint. The Mavericks trade was worse because of the process. They should have known better, and they were flipping their fans the bird with both hands. The Hawks at least had the illusion of uncertainty to point to.
3. Should LeBron James make the All-Star team this year? Will he?
Eamon Cassels: With all due respect to the second-greatest player of all-time, there’s no basketball-based argument for LeBron to be an All-Star this year. He has missed half the season, and his production doesn’t warrant an All-Star spot in the West. Frankly, there are 15 to 20 more deserving players this season. However, if LeBron wants to, he’ll get a spot and given his incredible career, I get it. Adam Silver can select an inevitable injury replacement, and I’d bet my life savings that he’d choose LeBron. I wouldn’t even rule out the coaches giving him a reserve spot out of respect.
Bryan Toporek: He shouldn't, but he likely will as a Lifetime Achievement Award. Between injury-related absences and Adam Silver's new cockamamie U.S. vs. the World format — which could necessitate him hand-picking more All-Stars if more than eight international players get voted in — there's almost no way that Silver will leave LeBron out of the All-Star festivities in what could be his final NBA season.
Matt Moore: The All-Star Game is not serious, and we should not treat it as such. We use it in HOF discussion like it means anything. Deni Avdija is seventh in the West for crying out loud because of various factors and him drawing a bunch of free throws. It’s an entertainment game and a money-making venture for the NBA and its associated partners and an excuse to party. That’s it. Put LeBron in the game because people know who he is and want to see him, and he’ll be happy to hang out at what might be his last one. We just can’t treat this thing with any seriousness.
Ian Levy: He shouldn't because he hasn't been one of the best 24 players in the league this season. He will because All-Star weekend is first and foremost a television show.
4. Which current NBA rookie has the best chance of winning a scoring title before their career is over?
Eamon Cassels: Cooper Flagg is the most well-rounded and talented rookie. However, VJ Edgecombe is the most naturally gifted scorer. I get it, his 16.5 points per game rank third among rookies, but the upside of his self-creation is better than anyone in this rookie class. I’m not sure if Edgecombe reaches his ceiling — but if he does, he could lead the league in scoring.
Bryan Toporek: Kon Knueppel, not Cooper Flagg, is leading the rookie class in scoring right now. If the Hornets eventually trade LaMelo and turn the full controls over to him, it's easy to imagine him averaging 25-plus points per game in the next few seasons. His combination of efficiency and high-volume three-point shooting — he's already averaging 8.1 long-range attempts per game while shooting 42.5 percent from deep — give him the right combination to break into that mix.
Matt Moore: I’ll go VJ Edgecombe, though I think Flagg, Kneuppel, and even Tre Johnson have the ability. Maybe even Cedric Coward. All of them have the range, versatility and scoring touch to do it. Best chance is Flagg because of usage, but I think the others actually have more “pure scorer” instincts.
Ian Levy: If I was betting with my own money, I'd go with Edgecombe. If I was betting with someone else's money, I'd throw down a couple bucks on Derik Queen. He'd have to make some 3s, and he may never get enough shot attempts considering his facilitation responsibilities. But he's got a lot of Julius Randle in him, with even more touch. Imagine him hitting like 35 percent of his 3s, shooting 20 times a game for a terrible Pelicans team that just unloaded Zion and Trey Murphy. That version of Queen could probably average 30, right?
5. What Eastern Conference contender has the bigger weakness — the shaky shooting of the Pistons, or the average defense of the Knicks and Celtics?
Eamon Cassels: It’s nearly impossible to win a championship with a defense outside of the top-10. So I’ll go with the average defense of the Knicks and Celtics as the bigger weakness. I also think the Pistons have a better chance to upgrade their shooting at the deadline. With that being said, I’m concerned with the Pistons’ lack of playoff experience and would still pick the Knicks to make it out of the East.
Bryan Toporek: The Jayson Tatum-less Celtics are a fun story, but I still can't consider them a legitimate contender unless he does actually return this year. With that said, I'll take the Knicks. The vibes there do not seem great as of late. When the playoffs roll around and teams start relentlessly targeting defensive liabilities, having two weak spots in Jalen Brunson and Karl-Anthony Towns may be insurmountable, even if it doesn't wind up biting them until the Finals. The lack of another reliable ball-handler to take pressure off Brunson isn't great, either!
Matt Moore: It’s the Knicks. The Celtics actually have a really good defense in certain lineups and will likely get better with Tatum back and potentially with trade deadline acquisitions. The Pistons at least have a consistent attack model. The Knicks are always hanging by a thread of opponent variance, and quite simply cannot build a good enough defense to win a title with Brunson and KAT together. KAT solo? Fine. Brunson solo with great help defenders? Mostly ok to fine. But together, they are too bad.
Ian Levy: I think it's the Knicks, but it's not just their defense — it's how much they have to rely on Jalen Brunson to create everything in the postseason. They have the worst defense of the three and, like Eamon said, if the Pistons make even a marginal upgrade at the deadline, the Knicks could have the worst offense of the three as well.