By June 17, 2026
LaMelo Ball, Brandon Miller, Miles Bridges, Grant Williams, and Tre Mann stand as the only remaining players from the Hornets roster at the start of the 2024-25 season.
The rest of the roster has been churned, reshaped or upgraded under President of Basketball Operations Jeff Peterson — from turning Cody Martin and Vasilije Micic into Nurkic, then Collin Sexton into Coby White; finding Moussa Diabate on the free agent scrap heap; to trading the oft-injured Mark Williams for two first-round picks.
But there is a clear difference between accumulating assets and value without prioritizing wins, and attempting to upgrade a roster that has already taken a meaningful step forward.
Charlotte’s 2025-26 season was a success. However, the play-in loss to Orlando and observations from the 2026 NBA Playoffs revealed clear weaknesses that need to be addressed.
The Hornets have one of the youngest rosters in the league, which struggles with physicality, lacks a top-end isolation scorer, operates with an undersized frontcourt, and continues to struggle in key areas such as half-court creation and getting to the free-throw line. No single trade addresses all of these structural issues.
At the same time, Charlotte sits in a unique position. They control a strong collection of future draft picks, have multiple neutral-value mid-sized contracts, and retain approximately $45 million in flexibility below the luxury tax. From a team-building perspective, few teams are better positioned to make a deal.
That is where the risk lies.
Many teams fall into what can be described as the “contention trap.” A team tastes success, accelerates its timeline, and makes a move it ultimately regrets. Charlotte’s approach under Peterson suggests they are aware of that danger. The goal is not to force a move, but to remain opportunistic.
With that in mind, let’s look at several trade pathways Charlotte could realistically explore.
Charlotte receives: Jalen Williams, Kenrich Williams
Oklahoma City receives: Brandon Miller, Josh Green, Grant Williams, 2029 1st (via UTA/CLE/MIN)
*This trade would have to happen after the draft due to Jalen Williams’ “poison pill” extension rules.
Charlotte perspective: Jalen Williams represents one of the cleanest fits potentially available on the trade market. Despite an injury-affected season, he profiles as a high-level two-way forward. His downhill driving, transition play, and defensive versatility directly address Charlotte’s weaknesses. Prior to injury, he had been ranked as a top-16 player in the league by outlets such as ESPN and The Ringer.
More importantly, his skill set complements LaMelo Ball and Kon Knueppel. Charlotte’s current core leans heavily towards offensively minded perimeter creation. Williams provides a defensive presence while offering a different offensive dynamic.
The decision here is philosophical. Brandon Miller offers similar long-term upside, but his development carries uncertainty, and his offensive profile overlaps with existing pieces.
Oklahoma City perspective: For Oklahoma City, this would be long-term financial flexibility and offensive balance. Miller could be retained on a slightly more manageable contract while adding shot creation to a team that has shown occasional offensive limitations against the Spurs. The additional pick creates more optionality for further moves down the line. Williams and Green are included to make salaries work, but Williams especially could have value to OKC.
Verdict: While it carries higher risk than other moves, Charlotte would be prioritizing certainty and fit over upside. It could raise their floor significantly, but comes with the risk of moving off a player who may ultimately reach a similar level. If the Hornets could be assured Williams’ hamstring injuries are behind him, this would be a sensible move.
Charlotte Receives: Indiana 2028 1st round pick (top-10 protected)
Indiana Receives: 2026 1st round pick (No. 18)
Charlotte perspective: This is less about talent and more about roster management. If Charlotte were to retain Coby White, waive Pat Connaughton, and use both of their 2026 first-round picks, they would already be at the maximum of 15 rostered players, limiting flexibility to upgrade elsewhere.
Adding two more rookies would mean that just over a third of the roster would be first- or second-year players. That carries risk both on the court and culturally, as the league’s youngest teams often struggle in the playoffs.
There is also draft context to consider. The 2027 class is projected to be weaker, and Charlotte already controlled multiple selections that year. Rolling the No. 18 pick into 2028 keeps the asset alive and protects the pick from potential complications tied to NBA expansion rumored to take place in 2028. It would also align with a future in which Charlotte may be closer to the cap and in greater need of cost-controlled talent.
Indiana perspective: The Pacers project to return to contention with Haliburton back and an improved supporting cast. Adding a controllable young player now would allow them to supplement their rotation over the next three years while they remain in their contention window.
Verdict: It won’t win the post-draft press conference, but it’s a forward-thinking move. If the Pacers falter in the coming years, the pick could return equivalent or even greater value. Maintaining flexibility and avoiding roster congestion also has real value.
Charlotte receives: Giannis Antetokounmpo
Milwaukee receives: Miles Bridges, Grant Williams, Josh Green and four to five first-round picks
Charlotte perspective: Giannis is the cleanest solution to Charlotte’s problems, but reports suggest he’s more likely to end up in Miami or Boston. He solves Charlotte’s lack of interior scoring, adds elite defense, brings physicality, and addresses their inability to generate free throws. He also carries championship experience, something the current roster lacks.
Structurally, there are multiple ways to build a deal. A package centered on Bridges, Williams, Green, and four to five first-round picks is viable. Alternatively, a more aggressive approach involving one of Ball or Miller would preserve future draft capital. Charlotte’s advantage here lies in flexibility; few teams can offer both variety and volume in a deal.
Milwaukee perspective: Milwaukee’s leverage seems to be decreasing. As seen with recent superstar trades, markets can soften quickly. If that trend continues, a deal built on picks and depth pieces may become more realistic than one focused on elite talent.
Verdict: The Hornets should not force this, but if the market drops into a range where the cost becomes reasonable, they should be prepared. Due diligence would need to be done on Giannis’ injury history, but if they believe he can maintain close to his MVP level of play over the next three seasons, then it should be considered. This is the type of move that can change a franchise’s trajectory, but it appears unlikely.
Charlotte receives: Domantas Sabonis
Sacramento receives: Miles Bridges, Josh Green, 2029 1st (least valuable of UTA/CLE/MIN)
Both Sam Amick and Marc Stein — two of the NBA’s most better-sourced reporters — have noted that the Hornets and Kings have discussed a potential framework for a Sabonis deal. According to Amick, a package built around Miles Bridges and Josh Green works financially, but Sacramento has also pushed to include either the No. 14 or No. 18 pick in this year’s draft.
In this version, the offer is scaled back slightly, with Charlotte instead including the least favorable of the Utah, Cleveland, and Minnesota 2029 first-round picks that it controls. The odds suggest that at least one of those teams will be competitive by 2029, making it likely the selection lands somewhere in the 20s.
Charlotte perspective: Sabonis would bring a unique offensive skill set to Charlotte. He is an elite playmaking big (career 4.9 assists per game) and one of the NBA’s most dominant rebounders on both ends (career 10.7 rebounds per game). His ability to operate out of dribble handoffs and provide scoring from the post would give the Hornets’ offense a different dimension.
However, there are clear trade-offs. If Sabonis were deployed alongside Moussa Diabaté in the frontcourt — effectively replacing Bridges — the team’s spacing would take a significant hit. Neither player stretches the floor, which could compress driving lanes for Charlotte’s guards.
Defensively, Sabonis remains a concern. He has long struggled to protect the rim or switch effectively onto the perimeter, issues that were evident during his time in Sacramento. Now on the wrong side of 30 and coming off an injury-affected season, there is also the possibility of further regression.
Sacramento perspective: Despite finishing near the bottom of the standings, the Kings carry the sixth-highest active roster payroll in the league at $205 million, and creating financial flexibility should be a priority. That said, Sabonis is a difficult asset to maximize in a trade. While he was an All-Star as recently as 2023, his skillset makes him tricky to fit alongside other stars as a complementary piece. Combined with recent injuries, this limits his trade value and reduces the potential return the Kings can realistically expect.
Verdict: This is a pass for me. There’s little doubt Sabonis would produce strong box score numbers in Charlotte and bring a level of physicality the roster currently lacks. However, his weaknesses are significant — and expensive– given he is owed $94 million over the next two seasons. The only scenario where this deal makes sense for Charlotte is if Sabonis is viewed purely as a temporary salary vehicle for a future move. Even then, including a first-round pick feels like an overpay. Without that incentive, Sacramento would likely prefer to hold onto Sabonis, hoping that a healthy stretch of play could rebuild his value ahead of the trade deadline.
Charlotte receives: Aaron Gordon
Denver receives: Miles Bridges, Moussa Diabate
Charlotte perspective: Gordon addresses immediate structural needs. He brings size, defensive versatility, and interior scoring to a roster that lacks all three. He also adds championship experience and is a proven role player who thrives alongside elite playmakers.
However, there are concerns. Gordon has dealt with recurring calf injuries, and much of his effectiveness is tied to his athleticism. While his three-point shooting has improved significantly, there is risk in projecting his long-term durability.
Denver perspective: The Nuggets gain depth and reduce salary, which are both goals for this off-season. Adding Bridges and Diabate gives them two younger, high-end rotation options instead of one higher-cost player, which may be valuable given their roster construction.
Verdict: This raises Charlotte’s ceiling, but significantly lowers their floor. Gambling on Gordon’s health is far too risky.
Charlotte receives: 2026 No. 10 pick (Milwaukee)
Milwaukee receives: 2026 No. 14 and No. 18 picks
Charlotte perspective: At No. 10, Charlotte would have access to frontcourt prospects they are unlikely to see at No. 14. Players such as Yaxel Lendenborg, Aday Mara, and Nate Ament all offer varying degrees of size, interior presence, and two-way upside, which aligns with Charlotte’s roster needs.
The appeal here also lies in consolidating picks. Charlotte doesn’t have enough roster spots to draft and retain all of its players over the next three years, but it can use those picks as currency to move up for players it believes in, rather than hoping they slide. The Hornets badly need size in the frontcourt and a player capable of bridging offensive and defensive responsibilities, which makes Yaxel Lendenborg the most likely target in such a scenario.
Milwaukee perspective: If the Bucks trade Giannis and transition into a rebuild, this framework gives them two chances to add young talent rather than one. Given the lack of young talent, that approach has some logic.
Verdict: Charlotte should not make this move without a clear target. Unless they are trading up specifically for Yaxel Lendenborg — whose fit in their frontcourt is ideal — I would not consider this deal.
Charlotte receives: Tari Eason (sign and trade, 3 years $60 million)
Houston receives: Grant Williams, 3 second-round picks
Charlotte perspective: Operating above the cap removes the ability to sign Eason directly, making a sign-and-trade necessary. Eason fits what Charlotte needs, offering length, defensive disruption, rebounding, and positional flexibility across both forward spots. His ability to impact games without high usage is particularly valuable alongside Ball, Miller and Knueppel. He could start at power forward or operate as a high-level rotational piece, depending on lineup construction.
Houston perspective: If Houston pays Eason in the $20-30 million starting range, the franchise could face apron restrictions. His level of play also dipped a little this year, as he suffered a lengthy shooting drought. With Kevin Durant and Jabari Smith Jr. locked in, his path to consistent playing time appears limited. Adding Williams would give Houston a low-cost replacement and reunite him with Udoka, who coached him in Boston. Moving Eason for assets and flexibility is a logical outcome.
Verdict: This is a clean and realistic move. It improves the roster without sacrificing core assets and aligns well with the Hornets’ timeline. However, it limits the team’s future financial flexibility without changing the trajectory.
Charlotte has multiple paths forward. They can consolidate assets, trade for fit, or take a significant swing for a star. The flexibility is there to do all of it. The challenge is not identifying a move; it is identifying the right one. For a team still defining itself, that is the hardest decision of all.
Read next:
