|
Post by DJ Jazzy Jeff on Jun 24, 2016 6:49:42 GMT -5
|
|
Steve Jobs
Oklahoma City Thunder
Posts: 2,918
Likes: 2,107
Total Bank: 50,500
|
Post by Steve Jobs on Jun 24, 2016 7:24:41 GMT -5
A lot to take in...
As Utah - I'm feeling really damn good about my haul. Frank the Tank, Slomo, a guy I was determined not to pay because he sucks, and a non-lottery 1st in a shallow draft class for Brandon Ingram, #31, and an expiring contract that doesn't hurt my bottom line at all. Kind of ridiculous, actually.
As Washington - I'm still not fully happy with this return. Trading #2 for #9, #30, #25, #17, and #17 doesn't inherently seem like a terrible haul, but considering that the actual players attached to #9 and one of the #17 were both terrible picks and could have gone 10 spots later and been perfectly acceptable, it's a package of high-risk, low-reward players for a guy that is most likely going to be a low-risk, high-reward player.
As Detroit - This trade is solid. I love Adams and think moving him today for his current 60-rating value is a mistake, but it's most likely just a lateral move... maybe even a slight step back depending on whether or not Barnes signs somewhere besides GSW and can distinguish himself as a much better player than anything he showed when overshadowed by Steph/Klay/Dray. But the price isn't bad, so it's a wash.
As Cleveland - I'm happy. Giving up Capela and Young for Adams is a major upgrade that I could have had to pay a lot more for.
It's hard to make a yes or not assessment of a 4-team trade based on each team's individual happiness, though... The easiest way I can think of to do this is to judge each team's trade by imagining a 1 on 1 trade with a team that has all the assets of the other three.
Utah/All: I would reject. Utah is getting a great return for some meh prospects, a player they would have let walk, and a meh pick.
Washington/All: I would reject. Washington is not getting enough, in my eyes, for their #2 pick.
Detroit/All: I would accept. Lateral move, certainly not franchise killing.
Cleveland/All: I would accept. Adams is not so head and shoulders above Capela to make this rejectable, although I do think Cleveland is getting a steal here.
Overall, I'm going to reject. There is a large amount of this trade that is acceptable, but the highest potential asset being moved (in my opinion) is the #2 pick, and that is the corner of the trade that is getting the lowest potential return.
|
|
Pete Maravich
Washington Wizards
Posts: 1,264
Likes: 772
Total Bank: 55,000
|
Post by Pete Maravich on Jun 24, 2016 8:33:03 GMT -5
A lot to take in...
As Utah - I'm feeling really damn good about my haul. Frank the Tank, Slomo, a guy I was determined not to pay because he sucks, and a non-lottery 1st in a shallow draft class for Brandon Ingram, #31, and an expiring contract that doesn't hurt my bottom line at all. Kind of ridiculous, actually.
As Washington - I'm still not fully happy with this return. Trading #2 for #9, #30, #25, #17, and #17 doesn't inherently seem like a terrible haul, but considering that the actual players attached to #9 and one of the #17 were both terrible picks and could have gone 10 spots later and been perfectly acceptable, it's a package of high-risk, low-reward players for a guy that is most likely going to be a low-risk, high-reward player.
As Detroit - This trade is solid. I love Adams and think moving him today for his current 60-rating value is a mistake, but it's most likely just a lateral move... maybe even a slight step back depending on whether or not Barnes signs somewhere besides GSW and can distinguish himself as a much better player than anything he showed when overshadowed by Steph/Klay/Dray. But the price isn't bad, so it's a wash.
As Cleveland - I'm happy. Giving up Capela and Young for Adams is a major upgrade that I could have had to pay a lot more for.
It's hard to make a yes or not assessment of a 4-team trade based on each team's individual happiness, though... The easiest way I can think of to do this is to judge each team's trade by imagining a 1 on 1 trade with a team that has all the assets of the other three. Utah/All: I would reject. Utah is getting a great return for some meh prospects, a player they would have let walk, and a meh pick. Washington/All: I would reject. Washington is not getting enough, in my eyes, for their #2 pick. Detroit/All: I would accept. Lateral move, certainly not franchise killing. Cleveland/All: I would accept. Adams is not so head and shoulders above Capela to make this rejectable, although I do think Cleveland is getting a steal here.
Overall, I'm going to reject. There is a large amount of this trade that is acceptable, but the highest potential asset being moved (in my opinion) is the #2 pick, and that is the corner of the trade that is getting the lowest potential return. Using draft slots as the only barometer for players who have played a season or two already is a mistake. Chad Ford has Capela as the #5 player from his draft. Kaminsky had the 4th most Win Shares in his rookie season behind KAT, Porzingis, & WCS. Slo Mo showed much improvement this year & started 11 games for a 67 win team.
|
|
|
Post by DJ Jazzy Jeff on Jun 24, 2016 8:39:16 GMT -5
Also take a look at Pete's roster. He has barely any assets, this deal is netting him a slew of players on their rookie contracts and guys who can fill up roster spots, who can be trade pieces and hopefully help him contend in the longrun.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Timberlake on Jun 24, 2016 9:08:40 GMT -5
I don't like that 2nd in their at all. I think getting a 6.5M guy for one yr is nothing haha. The pick is a huge overcompensation and going to the team that needs it the least imo
|
|
|
Post by DJ Jazzy Jeff on Jun 24, 2016 9:20:44 GMT -5
Let me elaborate, I wanted this deal to get done, DET said it would be hard on his cap situation to take on Barnes, I offered to take a contract from him, we agreed on Landry and as a contending team, it would be burdensome to take on a player that is useless with money that will damper my own cap situation.... Sooo the 2nd rounder will make it easier for me to move Landry's contract and DET said he doesn't want the pick. I do not intend to draft someone at 31.
|
|
|
Post by DJ Jazzy Jeff on Jun 24, 2016 9:21:33 GMT -5
|
|
billy
Miami Heat
Posts: 7,174
Likes: 6,145
Total Bank: 3,050
|
Post by billy on Jun 24, 2016 9:37:26 GMT -5
I accept but Washington is getting hosed.
I had pick 2 in D5, and just traded it for Wiggins.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Timberlake on Jun 24, 2016 9:37:48 GMT -5
Let me elaborate, I wanted this deal to get done, DET said it would be hard on his cap situation to take on Barnes, I offered to take a contract from him, we agreed on Landry and as a contending team, it would be burdensome to take on a player that is useless with money that will damper my own cap situation.... Sooo the 2nd rounder will make it easier for me to move Landry's contract and DET said he doesn't want the pick. I do not intend to draft someone at 31. Whether you plan to draft someone or not, the value there isn't matching up for me. Last night 31 ended up being Deyonte Davis, someone expected to go in the 10-15 range. And for someone getting the 2nd overall pick (the most valuable asset in the trade), I think getting a 6.5M guy isn't that burdensome. I'd be much more comfortable with Washington getting it or Cleveland giving their's to Wash.
|
|
|
Post by DJ Jazzy Jeff on Jun 24, 2016 9:39:17 GMT -5
okay, I will edit that now.
Edited to reflect WAS receiving #31
|
|
|
Post by DJ Jazzy Jeff on Jun 24, 2016 9:44:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Justin Timberlake on Jun 24, 2016 10:01:44 GMT -5
I'll accept now.
|
|
|
Post by John Stockton on Jun 24, 2016 10:09:50 GMT -5
technically if you amend the trade you need to post a new thread and have all the involved parties accept it again
|
|
|
Post by DJ Jazzy Jeff on Jun 24, 2016 10:16:02 GMT -5
Should I do that? There is a time constraint and I have discussed with the parties involved with the changes before making them obviously.
|
|
|
Post by John Stockton on Jun 24, 2016 10:19:01 GMT -5
yes since you amended the trade none of the teams or tc members that accept count
|
|
|
Post by Brown Cobb IV on Jun 24, 2016 10:26:44 GMT -5
why doesnt washington just make the selection? and then you can repost the trade
|
|
billy
Miami Heat
Posts: 7,174
Likes: 6,145
Total Bank: 3,050
|
Post by billy on Jun 24, 2016 10:42:56 GMT -5
Should I do that? There is a time constraint and I have discussed with the parties involved with the changes before making them obviously. Or at least get them to vote in here again. They do have to officially approve any edits. You still have 36 hours.
|
|
Steve Jobs
Oklahoma City Thunder
Posts: 2,918
Likes: 2,107
Total Bank: 50,500
|
Post by Steve Jobs on Jun 24, 2016 12:44:55 GMT -5
Nope, my issue is with Washington trading a high potential player for a huge package full of mediocre potential. If you're going to give up Ingram, you should at least be getting back a player that has a haf-decent chance to be the player Ingram could be if he pans out. Not trusting Ingram to be good and trading him like he's definitely not going to be good are two very different concepts.
|
|