NBA Trade Deadline: Roundtable reaction to Spencer Hawes trade and other deals around NBA

It was a relatively uneventful NBA trade deadline on Thursday. But that doesn't mean nothing happened. There was still a good deal of rumors and such. Here are our reactions to everything that happened and didn't happen.

1. What'd you think of the Cavs' deal for Spencer Hawes? Did the Cavs get good value? Does he fit with this squad?

Conrad: I really didn't like it at first, but it makes some sense now that I really think about it. He should definitely help the spacing on offense and the Cavs didn't give up all that much to get him. He's only signed for 25 games, but I figure that Cleveland would have had interest in him over the summer, so why not get a trial run and see if he fits with what you're trying to do? If it's a good fit, try to re-sign him. If it's not, at least you know and you won't make a big mistake this summer.

2. Were there any trades that really shocked you on NBA trade deadline day?

Conrad: The Cavs trading for Hawes shocked me. I thought it was bogus when people reported that the Cavs were even interested. Then it happened like 10 minutes later. I didn't expect Cleveland to be interested in him at all and we hadn't really heard anything about it being a possibility before yesterday morning.

David: No. It kind of sucked, right? I would have liked to see Oklahoma City, New Orleans, or Detroit make a move or two (separately or not) to get to where they are going a little quicker. All of them sat tight.

Ryan: The Pacers trading for Evan Turner.

Justin: The only deal that surprised me was the Hawes trade. It had sounded like Philly had been wanting more all season and then moved arguably the best player traded yesterday for nothing.

Patrick: The only one that surprised me much at all was the Danny Granger for Evan Turner and Lavoy Allen trade. That should be a nice move for the Pacers if Turner can mesh well with the team, and Lavoy Allen is a solid backup big. It does make me sad for Danny Granger, who has to leave his batcave behind. Oh, and a championship contender. That too.

Sam: Hmm. Maybe the Sixers-Pacers one because I don't really understand the value of it from the Sixers' point of view. Like, I know they weren't re-signing Turner anyway, but they essentially gave him and Lavoy Allen away for a second rounder. Kudos to Hinkie for getting something I guess, but I figured that it would be more.

3. Were there any players that you really thought were going to get moved that didn't?

Conrad: Emeka Okafor. The Suns have 4 first round picks in this upcoming draft. They have Okafor's big expiring contract. How did they not combine those two things to improve their team? Are you going to use all 4 of those picks? Are you going to draft a better player than some of the guys that were available for trade? I doubt it.

Also: Jordan Hill. What the hell, Lakers? Why didn't you trade Jordan Hill?

David: I really think Detroit should have moved either Greg Monroe or Josh Smith. My only guess (hope) is that Dumars is on the way out and maybe his hands are tied from making any big moves.

Ryan: Very surprised the Sixers weren't able to move Thaddeus Young. He was their best player and most valuable trading chip.

Justin: I thought it was a lock for Jarrett Jack to be traded, especially when the Minnesota rumors came out. Beyond that I guess the only other non trade that surprised me was Harrison Barnes staying put. It sounded like the Warriors were trying to upgrade themselves with more than just Steve Blake.

Patrick: The two guys that requested trades didn't get traded for some reason. Thaddeus Young must've hit the sauce hard after hearing he wasn't traded yesterday and is going to spend the rest of the year getting blown out by 50 points every night. Omer Asik must also be disappointed, and I as well, as I was hoping he'd make his way to the Cavs. I can't imagine they don't get traded before next year's trade deadline.

Sam: I can't say I'm surprised that some guys didn't get moved just because the trade market has totally collapsed. Because teams are signing guys to shorter deals generally, the market for expiring deals has collapsed a little. Plus, no one wanted to move first rounders this year. Having said that though, it literally makes no sense that Jordan Hill is still a Laker. Like, it made no sense for him to be a Cavalier, but it makes even less sense that a solid bench big like him didn't net a second from somebody.

4. Which team made the best deal of the day?

Conrad: The Golden State Warriors probably improved their team the most. They traded two dudes that they never used for Steve Blake. Their biggest need was probably backup point guard. Their offense has been horrible when Stephen Curry sits down this year. Blake can help that a little bit.

David: The Bobcats got Gary Neal, who could be pretty helpful in their push to make the playoffs. Not sure how much better her is than Ramon Sessions who went back to Milwaukee in the deal. Might have been the Cavs, honestly, though I see Kevin Pelton gave them a D for the move.

Ryan: I'll say the Cavs, reluctantly. Hawes is the only player that will start and might make a big impact. Washington upgrading from a flaming pile of point guard to Andre Miller behind John Wall is ok, but that has more to do with how bad Eric Maynor and Garrett Temple have been. I also like the Rocket's getting Jordan Hamilton for basically free.

Justin: Best deal was probably the acquisition of Turner for Indy. Only because it's probably the only move that impacted the title race.

Patrick: I'd like to say the Cavs made the best deal, but I'll switch things up and say the Bobcats. Gary Neal gives them a 3-point threat they desperately need, and Luke Ridnour is a considerably better backup PG option than Ramon Sessions, at least in my estimation. It's a somewhat disconcerting trade from a Cavalier perspective, as I this improves one of our rivals for a playoff spot.

Sam: Probably the Pacers. I don't love Evan Turner, but he's not a bad basketball player like he's been painted in some corners. He's actually good offensive player that can create shots and move well off ball. His defense leaves something to be desired, but maybe Vogel and the Pacers' system can help him out there. Also, it's worth mentioning they have Lance Stephenson expiring this year, meaning Turner's RFA rights may come in handy. I don't think Turner gives the Pacers any leverage with Stephenson, but he represents a decidedly not awful backup option.

5. Which team made the worst deal of the day?

Conrad: There really weren't many (or any) bad deals. I might go with the Bobcats just because I'm not sure that Gary Neal helps them more than Ramon Sessions. Seems pretty lateral to me.

David: If you think the Cavs should be tanking, the Cavs. Maybe that's the right call. I don't know.

Ryan: The Pacers, I think. Evan Turner just isn't very good. The Sixers play at the fastest pace in the league, so while his numbers look good on their face, he's just a guy that puts up tons of shots, and they're mostly bad shots. In a limited role, Turner's need for the ball and inability to shoot or defend well will probably hurt more than it helps. I think Granger is the better player. Honorable mention to the Nuggets. I don't know what their fascination with tiny point guards is, and giving up a young wingman for Aaron Brooks seems silly.

Justin: Ummm... I guess if you want to pretend Philly wants to win games, basically everything they did.

Patrick: Any time you can trade the rights to a player from the 2005 NBA Draft for Antawn Jamison only to buy him out, I guess you have to do it. Or at least that's what Atlanta thought. It's not that the move was bad per se, but it's just perplexing. I just feel obligated to label anything involved "Antahn" as awful.

Sam: I don't think anyone made a "bad" deal. Maybe the Sixers Byron Mullens move because who the hell wants Mullens on their team?