At first glance, Ja Morant and Trae Young appear to occupy similar territory in the NBA trade deadline discourse. Both are former franchise cornerstones that have seen their value complicated by on-court results and off-court considerations. Both also play for teams hovering in the middle of their respective conference races, but the similarities end there. The underlying economics facing the stuck-in-place Memphis Grizzlies and Atlanta Hawks are fundamentally different, which is why Zach Kleiman cannot afford to sell low on Morant in the way Bryson Graham might feel compelled to with Young.
Both are explosive scorers capable of single-handedly swinging games, yet their teams, the Hawks (17-21) and Grizzlies (15-20), sit precariously in 10th place in their respective conferences. Atlanta’s predicament is largely financial and contractual. Young carries a $45.99 million cap hit this season, followed by a looming player option worth $48.9 million next year. For rival front offices, that structure is problematic on multiple levels.
The true cost of a star in the modern NBA isn't just measured by salary, but by the length of the rope he gives a front office to build a contender, and how quickly it might slip from their hands. Teams trying to avoid the luxury tax or first apron must weigh not only the immediate salary matching challenge, but also the risk that Young could opt out this summer. In that scenario, a trade partner would be surrendering meaningful assets for what could amount to a four-month rental.
Even if Young opts in, the long-term outlook is daunting. He is widely expected to seek an extension in the $50 to $60 million per year range over four years. That type of commitment reshapes a franchise’s entire cap sheet and narrows roster-building flexibility under the league’s new collective bargaining agreement.
The Hawks, sitting four games out of fifth place and facing a legitimate risk of sliding out of the Play-In Tournament altogether, feel real pressure to act. Standing pat risks losing leverage. Acting decisively risks selling at a discount. That is the corner Atlanta has painted itself into with Young.
Memphis does not face the same structural squeeze. Morant’s $39.44 million cap hit this season is meaningfully lower, and more importantly, he is under contract through the 2027-28 season. His future cap figures of $42.16 million in 2026-27 and $44.88 million in 2027-28 are far more manageable relative to projected cap growth. For a front office, those figures certainty matters. It allows for multi-year planning, sequencing of extensions, and deliberate roster construction rather than reactive asset shuffling.
Yes, Morant’s play has been subpar by his own standards, and that has depressed his perceived value. That is precisely why Memphis cannot afford to sell low. The Grizzlies would be monetizing the asset at its weakest point, not because of age or contract risk, but because of context. Tuomas Iisalo's squad has been banged up, shorthanded, and rarely whole. The team’s current position in 10th place reflects attrition more than a collapsed competitive window.
Just as important, the external pressure simply is not there. The Western Conference teams lurking behind the Grizzlies are not exactly mounting a coordinated charge. The Utah Jazz, Dallas Mavericks, New Orleans Pelicans, and LA Clippers have all looked overmatched for extended stretches. Memphis may be stuck in 10th, but they are not being actively hunted. That absence of urgency preserves optionality.
There is also a market reality at play. A younger superstar under long-term control at a below-max relative salary is a fundamentally different trade chip than a high-usage guard approaching a potential opt-out and mega-extension. Even with questions surrounding Morant, the Grizzlies know that time is on their side. Improved health, internal development, or simply a cleaner stretch of games can recalibrate his value without any front-office gymnastics.
The Hawks, by contrast, are operating against the clock. Young’s contract timeline, combined with the tenuous playoff positioning, forces uncomfortable decisions sooner rather than later. The risk of holding and losing leverage is realin Atlanta. For Memphis, that risk is minimal. Selling low on Morant would not be strategic flexibility. It would be self-inflicted damage. Frankly, unless Morant forces the issues and asks out, the logic for a discounted exit simply does not exist.
