The Pacers are realistically in title-contention mode; the next two years are their best shots at a chip since Reggie Miller was on the squad, and, as such, they can't really afford to try to be a developmental team. Walker has had three years to develop, and if he's unable to consistently produce value outside of shooting (defense, rebounding, anything that's subject to less variance), the Pacers should look to move off of him.

Why the Pacers do this: They firmly upgrade from an underwhelming but still playable Walker and replace him with a savvy young-ish PF whose shooting isn't otherworldly, but who has a positive impact on his team's offensive rebounding and the opponent's shooting whilst maintaining roughly neutral impact on defensive turnovers, defensive rebounding and offensive turnovers. It's a bit of a 'my bad players for your good players' trade, but that's why they also have to throw in two second-rounders to give the deal any chance of working.

If they can pull this off, this would absolutely be a winning trade by the Pacers.

Why the Warriors (might) do this: The Warriors are straddling the far edge of their two timelines; the same concept that led them to drafting Wiseman might lead them to a much worse transitory period than they have to endure.

Are the Warriors fully committed to giving Steph and the crew one last spin? Probably. Are they also trying to prepare for their post-Curry future and the inevitable wandering in the wilderness they'll have to go through? Likely. I think Gui could be valued as a part of this team's post-Curry future, and it would be rightfully so; both Santos and Podziemski are valuable players despite their aesthetic lackings.

Which is why they have to try and keep at least one as they rebuild on the chance that they can find their next iteration of the franchise quickly; both are under 25, and either should be able to provide positive impact for the next seven or so years.

So why give up on Santos and take on Walker?

Rebuilding.

The most consistent way to rebuild a franchise is not to trade away star players; it's to gather expiring contracts, get roster and cap space, and take on bad contracts with picks attached. When those contracts expire, you can simply repeat the process (there will always be bad contracts in the NBA). You can, of course, do player rehabilitation, and that certainly can work, but stacking future draft assets you can slowly cash in on or push towards a young star is how you rebuild.

Walker could be good in San Francisco, who knows. But what's true is that he's an expiring contract (if he's bad, simply let him go and get 8 million off the books) who will enter RFA next offseason (or if he's good, you have advantage on retaining him), which perfectly fits the Warriors' needs.

Now, is two second-rounders enough to compensate for the opportunity cost of swapping Walker for Santos this year, and whatever production Santos could have had for the Warriors post-Curry, whether or not Walker stays with the franchise? I don't know, but it's not the important part of the trade. Everyone will feel different, so please feel free to share how many picks would make this trade 'fair'.

Importantly, this leaves the Warriors with 8 players on the roster and a hair under 80 million dollars of payroll come the '27-'28 season, assuming they extend Podz (guessing 30 million in his first year) and no other moves. This leaves them in prime position to both perform a The Process™, sifting through players to find impact role players, as well as to take on a bloated contract (or two) with draft picks attached.

Perhaps Orlando decides they do not, in fact, want to pay Paolo Banchero north of forty million per year and ever so graciously ship him out to the West Coast with pick compensations and/or a young player or two, who the Warriors can look to re-route for more draft capital after sufficiently plumping up their trade value. But what do I know?

Have a good one!