2025 NBA Draft: Will Spurs, 76ers trade down from top 3? It’s a rare move, but here’s why it could make sense

Trading down from a top-3 pick is a rare move in the NBA draft. You almost never see it. Why would you? Rookie-scale contracts are the best deals in basketball, and the higher a team picks, the better its odds historically of landing a franchise changer. Most GMs would rather get fired swinging for a future All-Star than risk sliding down the board and watching the guy they passed on torch them for the next decade.

McHale and Parish for Joe Barry Carroll. Webber for Penny. Fultz for Tatum. Luka for Trae. These are the kinds of trades that have shaped eras.

Advertisement

Since 1980, only 10 teams with a top-3 pick have traded down and stayed within the lottery. That’s 10 out of 135 chances over 45 drafts. Here they are:

1980: Celtics traded No. 1 to Warriors

• Warriors picked Joe Barry Carroll

• Celtics moved down to third, drafted Kevin McHale, and also got Robert Parish in one of the biggest heists in NBA history

1988: Sixers traded No. 3 to Clippers

• Clippers picked Charles Smith

• Sixers moved to sixth, took Hersey Hawkins, plus a 1989 first (Kenny Payne); Payne didn’t pan out, but Hawkins became an All-Star in Philly

1993: Magic traded No. 1 to Warriors

• Warriors took Chris Webber, who left Golden State after one season

• Magic dropped to third, took Penny Hardaway and three future firsts, which included a pick that eventually became Vince Carter (though Orlando had already traded it away); still, Orlando won the trade considering the playoff success of Shaq and Penn

1997: Sixers traded No. 2 to Nets

• Nets picked Keith Van Horn, and also acquired Lucious Harris, giving them two key pieces that helped push the Nets to the Finals a few years later

• Sixers got the seventh pick, who ended up being Tim Thomas, plus the 21st pick (Anthony Parker), and a journeyman scorer (Jim Jackson)

2004: Clippers traded No. 2 to Bobcats

• Bobcats picked Emeka Okafor, who gave them the clear win in the deal

• Clips dropped to fourth (Shaun Livingston) and got the 33rd pick (Lionel Chalmers)

2005: Blazers traded No. 3 to Jazz

• Jazz took Deron Williams, landing their point guard of the decade

• Blazers moved to sixth (Martell Webster) and got the 27th pick (Linas Kleiza) and a future first (Joel Freeland)

2006: Bulls traded No. 2 to Blazers

• Blazers took LaMarcus Aldridge, winning the deal in a landslide

• Bulls moved to fourth and took Tyrus Thomas, plus got Viktor Khryapa, a young player at the time

2008: Wolves traded No. 3 to Grizzlies

• Wolves moved to fifth and took Kevin Love, and got a quality role player (Mike Miller) in a huge win for the franchise

2017: Celtics traded No. 1 to Sixers

• Sixers took Markelle Fultz, one of the biggest busts in recent league history

• Celtics moved to No. 3 (Jayson Tatum) and added a 2019 first (Romeo Langford) in what was a Danny Ainge masterclass

2018: Hawks traded No. 3 to Mavs

• Mavs took Luka Dončić, the clear best player in the trade

• Hawks moved to fifth and took Trae Young and 2019 first (Cam Reddish)

History tells us: half the time it works, half the time it blows up a franchise. And we haven’t seen a single trade down in the top 3 this decade. That might finally change in 2025.

Will Spurs, Sixers trade down?

The Spurs hold the second pick. The Sixers are third. San Antonio and Philly aren’t shopping their picks per se, but they’re listening. League sources say New Orleans (seventh) and Brooklyn (eighth) have reached out about moving up. The teams drafting fourth through sixth — the Hornets, Jazz, and Wizards, respectively — all have three top-45 picks and a stash of future ammo. They’re lurking too. Even the Sixers reportedly inquired with the Spurs about swapping spots.

Advertisement

There’s so much gossip around these picks because the two players projected to go after Cooper Flagg don’t cleanly fit the Spurs or Sixers in the second and third spots.

One year ago, the Spurs drafted guard Stephon Castle in the lottery. Months later, they traded for point guard De’Aaron Fox. And now they’re in position to pick Rutgers point guard Dylan Harper, a 6-foot-5 freight train with a shaky jumper. That’s three guards, none of whom are knockdown shooters, surrounding a generational 7-foot-5 center in Victor Wembanyama. The Spurs likely wouldn’t have traded for Fox if they knew they’d end up with Harper. Now they could have three non-shooting guards and Wemby wondering if San Antonio doesn’t believe in space.

Philadelphia’s problem is different. Harper’s teammate Ace Bailey is a high-variance bet as a 6-8 shot-maker with tantalizing upside but little discipline, shaky playmaking, and questionable defense. The Sixers aren’t in the business of developmental projects when they’re trying to win with Joel Embiid right now and invest in a future that can survive without him. Bailey checks the future box, but not the present day box.

Advertisement

Harper actually fits better in Philly than in San Antonio, since Tyrese Maxey and Jared McCain provide elite shooting in the backcourt, plus other role players can create enough space that mitigates the need for Harper to ever become a knockdown guy. And Bailey makes more sense for a team like Brooklyn or New Orleans — or any franchise that can afford to roll the dice on upside.

So the question becomes: If San Antonio and Philly don’t love the board, and other teams do, could we finally see a top-3 trade down? Here are four prospects who’d make the most sense if the Spurs and 76ers move back and add assets:

Why you take him: Knueppel’s a sniper. Deep range. Quick release. Smart movement. Plus his midrange craft and interior footwork are also ahead of his years. And while he won’t dunk on anyone in traffic, he carves out buckets with angles, touch, and timing. Knueppel feels like a guy who will end up playing 15 years and make everyone he shares the floor with better.

Advertisement

Why the Spurs would do it: A two-man game partner for Wemby. Their synergy could end up beautiful to watch. And he’d perfectly complement both Castle and Fox with his floor spacing too.

Why the Sixers would do it: Knueppel could play off Embiid and Maxey and serve as a lower-usage creator for them. And he could contribute as soon as he steps on an NBA floor without the hopes of being a star because Knueppel cares about nothing more than winning games.

Why you take him: Johnson says his favorite NBA comparison is Ray Allen, and it’s easy to see why with the way he uses screens, sets his feet, and shoots flames from every spot on the floor. He is also the draft’s best shooter off the dribble and has both the confidence and flair to come up big in the clutch. His college team asked him to score, not facilitate, but he showed point-guard chops in high school that could manifest for him at the next level.

Advertisement

Why the Spurs would do it: Fox is the tempo-setter, Castle is the connector, and Johnson could be the microwave. Imagine bringing Johnson off the bench and telling him to go get buckets. And when he’d share the floor with Wemby, he’d give him the best shooter he’s ever had in his career and a proven mover without the ball who can also find him for buckets.

Why the Sixers would do it: There might be too much overlap with Maxey and McCain, but we also just saw the Pacers get to the NBA Finals often with three leaner guards on the floor. More shot creation in the backcourt wouldn’t hurt.

Why you take him: Full-speed cuts. Violent dunks. Chase-down blocks. High-flying rebounds. That’s the Edgecombe experience; he plays with a fearlessness at all times on the floor, no matter the situation. He projects as a knockdown shooter, too, after making over 40% of his 3s in high school. While playing for the Bahamas national team, he also showed off point-guard skills. So even though he played a more condensed role as a Baylor freshman, his on-ball flashes shouldn’t be overlooked.

Advertisement

Why the Spurs would do it: Wemby needs both spacing and athletes flying around him. Edgecombe does both. If the Spurs want to surround their star with hungry role players who cut, defend, and shoot? VJ checks those boxes while still retaining star upside.

Why the Sixers would do it: Edgecombe is such a perfect fit that he might end up the pick even if the Sixers stay put at No. 3: He would give Philly speed and physicality on the wing, and he doesn’t need the offense to run through him. In the short-term, he can light a fuse for his team. In the long-term, maybe he blossoms into something special.

Why you take him: Maluach is 7-1 with rim protection instincts and the mobility to switch. He didn’t start playing basketball until he was 13, so he’s raw. But he knows his role, plays hard, and dunks everything at the rim. He also has touch on layups, hook shots, and free throws, so maybe someday he’ll be shooting 3s.

Advertisement

Why the Spurs would do it: San Antonio doesn’t need another center, but that’s what makes it interesting. They can develop Maluach slowly behind Wemby. And if it clicks, they walk away with a freakishly mobile backup 5 or a partner in a jumbo frontcourt.

Why the Sixers would do it: The Sixers can’t count on Embiid forever. Maluach is an insurance policy. But even if Embiid stays healthy from here on out, Maluach can serve as the most skilled backup center they’ve had in years and a worthy option for two-big lineups. It’d certainly add a new wrinkle.

If Bailey’s stock drops, one of these players could end up being the trade-up target behind Harper. The worst-case scenario with these players isn’t catastrophic. Maybe they don’t become stars, but they still become solid role players. Knockdown shooters, guys who make the right read and care about doing the little things. They’re culture guys. And if any one of them hits their top percentile outcome, then we’re talking about steals.

There are some alternative options, too, a little further down the board:

Coward has gone from a Division III player to a projected first-rounder. He defends, cuts, rebounds, swings the ball, and knocks down shots all without needing touches. And with his strength and footwork, there’s some Kawhi-lite go-to scoring in there too. Coward ranks eighth on my board and second in my heart.

Burly big with guard-like handles who dazzles with spin moves and crafty finishes. He needs to prove himself on defense, but he could be a matchup nightmare on offense since he might end up too quick for bigs and too strong for wings.

Toolsy forward with a fluid handle, dynamic finishing package, and highly versatile defense. Playing internationally this year, he lives at the free throw line thanks to his quick first step and long strides. He’s a home-run-swing pick because if the jumper someday clicks, there’s major steal potential.

CMB is a defensive savant who switches 1 through 5, swipes everything, and inhales rebounds. He’s a special defensive presence, and offensively he’s a bulldozer finisher with a playmaking feel. Improving his jumper would move him out of tweener territory and into All-Star status.

Rangy, athletic forward who projects as a highly versatile defender. And though he’s raw as a ball-handler, he’s a skilled spot-up shooter and a hyper-aware cutter. At a minimum, he has the baseline skills to be a great role player with the upside to someday be much more.

Staying put vs. moving down

Sometimes the scariest part isn’t even the act of trading down — it’s passing on the chance. In the historic 2003 draft, LeBron James went first to the Cavaliers, then the Pistons held the second pick. On the board? Darko Milicic, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade. As the story goes, Pistons GM Joe Dumars wasn’t high on Melo and was deciding between Darko and Bosh. Nuggets general manager Kiki Vandeweghe, picking third, called about moving up right to the moment Detroit went on the clock. Denver wanted Darko. But Detroit stood pat, took Darko, and made one of the biggest mistakes in draft history. Had the Pistons moved down one spot, the Nuggets would have taken Darko and Detroit would’ve landed Bosh to extend their contending years. That one choice changed the trajectory of two franchises and an entire era.

Advertisement

The lesson: Sometimes staying put is just as risky as moving down. Especially in a draft where everyone agrees on Flagg at No. 1, and no one agrees on anything after. The second- and third-ranked guys vary wildly depending on which gym, spreadsheet, or group chat you’re in. Some scouts rank Harper equal to Flagg, and will always remind you that if Flagg never reclassified he’d be the clear-cut top pick. Others acknowledge that fact but think the Spurs would be wise to look for a haul rather than deal with the iffy backcourt fit. Some executives think the Sixers are completely short-sighted if they pass on Bailey, and delusional about their odds of making a run with Embiid. Others say Bailey’s flaws make him a player they just simply would not draft.

This is where front offices get an edge, or lose their jobs. Not always by blindly sticking to the consensus, but by trusting their board, knowing their roster, and extracting value. Make the right call, and you might land the player who changes your franchise. Make the wrong one, and you’re the next chapter in a cautionary tale.

Advertisement

The Spurs already have their generational anchor. The clock’s not ticking yet, but they better not waste the silence. Whereas, the Sixers have pressure. They have Embiid in his 30s, Maxey rising, and a cap sheet that’s about to get complicated. A trade down could help them stay competitive now and buy a ticket to whatever the post-Embiid future looks like.

You don’t get many shots at a top-3 pick. Sometimes the smartest move is realizing your guy isn’t actually there.