Trade Thread (TRADE WARS EPISODE IV: A NEW HOPE)

[FNQ]

I don't care how good you might be, but if you go to a team where the coach doesn't utilize you the best way possible, you're not going to do very well. So having a good coach, who knows how to coach use as well as where to use you and in what situation has a major impact on how you develop and what you are able to achieve.

Disagree. Curry was misused while Monta was here, he was still good. Klay and Green were misused by Jackson, and their talent and impact was still evident. Barnes went from total trash last year to good complementary piece.. and haven't teams done stuff like that with waiver wire pick ups? Guys who have failed terribly at one spot, only to be used in a better role elsewhere? So did Barnes all of a sudden become a midrange maven.. or was he just ushered away from isoball, where it highlighted his weaknesses as a player?

You take each of our players and disperse them to different teams, with different coaches and different players and I guarantee you that none of them likely do as well as they've done here. A lot of it also has to do of putting together the right mix of talent, players and coaching which is what has happened here. Even Steph wouldn't likely be able to do what he has for us this year under a different coach, a different system and different players which may not complement him as well.

Disagree here too, to a degree. *Maybe* Steph wouldnt do as well. But their wouldnt be a vast transformation, where he would become a barely passable rotation player. Ditto Iguodala, Klay, Green, Bogut.. maybe Livingston and Speights, but their skills tend to translate a lot better due to their passing/handling and rebounding skills, respectively. But less talented players thrive on fit, and that's what we're seeing: a moderately talented player in Barnes who was used in the absolute worst way possible by a poor coach, now being used in what looks to be the best way possible by a great coach. But some fans would attribute Kerr's usage of Barnes as finite improvements in him that he can continue to build off of, in places that aren't here. And the #s say that that isn't true right now. Potential remains, but it's still unrealized right now, and the odds are currently against him moving far beyond what he is now.

[turk3d]

I don't care how good you might be, but if you go to a team where the coach doesn't utilize you the best way possible, you're not going to do very well. So having a good coach, who knows how to coach use as well as where to use you and in what situation has a major impact on how you develop and what you are able to achieve.

Disagree. Curry was misused while Monta was here, he was still good. Klay and Green were misused by Jackson, and their talent and impact was still evident. Barnes went from total trash last year to good complementary piece.. and haven't teams done stuff like that with waiver wire pick ups? Guys who have failed terribly at one spot, only to be used in a better role elsewhere? So did Barnes all of a sudden become a midrange maven.. or was he just ushered away from isoball, where it highlighted his weaknesses as a player?
A little bit of revisionist history here. No way was Curry back then as he is today, not even close. Same goes for last year. He was a sieve on defense (not that he didn't try), he was hurt much of the time and he wasn't really even our best player at the time although the talent has always been there (sure I'll get major arguments on this). As for "waiver wire" guys, you can say the same for almost every player, it's usually hit or miss, sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't. Even #2 draft picks turn out to be good sometimes (hi Dray, Monta) and sometime high lottery picks to out to be s t.

You take each of our players and disperse them to different teams, with different coaches and different players and I guarantee you that none of them likely do as well as they've done here. A lot of it also has to do of putting together the right mix of talent, players and coaching which is what has happened here. Even Steph wouldn't likely be able to do what he has for us this year under a different coach, a different system and different players which may not complement him as well.

Disagree here too, to a degree. *Maybe* Steph wouldnt do as well. But their wouldnt be a vast transformation, where he would become a barely passable rotation player. Ditto Iguodala, Klay, Green, Bogut.. maybe Livingston and Speights, but their skills tend to translate a lot better due to their passing/handling and rebounding skills, respectively. But less talented players thrive on fit, and that's what we're seeing: a moderately talented player in Barnes who was used in the absolute worst way possible by a poor coach, now being used in what looks to be the best way possible by a great coach. But some fans would attribute Kerr's usage of Barnes as finite improvements in him that he can continue to build off of, in places that aren't here. And the #s say that that isn't true right now. Potential remains, but it's still unrealized right now, and the odds are currently against him moving far beyond what he is now.

Really? If that were so why do guys like even Lebron look to move to different teams in free agency (aside from money because Lebron has a taken a hit on that in order to play on a team which he thinks will complement him)? And to play for a coach who they think will put together a good system and give his co-players the best chance to succeed? Why are we (every player to a man who was on this team last year) better than they were under MJ? It makes a heckuva lot of difference.

Perhaps the coaching has a lot more to do as well as game preparation in addition to a better system which has upped his (and everyone else on this teams) numbers? And why under these same coaches under this same system are you so sure he won't improve? A lot of guys make it to allstars who probably don't necessarily deserve it. Why is it not even possible that Barnes won't "luck in" and make it?He continues to improve, a lot of guys get injured on wind up in bad situations then it's very conceivable he can make it at some point.

[The-Power]

DJ led the NBA in rebound rate and defensive rebound rate. For every possible defensive rebound available while he was on court, he grabbed one of 3. How is that not elite, but finishing #5 in OREB elite?

Individual rebound numbers don't necessarily indicate his impact on the boards when we're talking about team-success in this area that can be attributed to him. He's chasing after every rebound and is horrible at boxing out, thus his individual numbers look great while the outcome for the team can be negative. There is regression data (FFAPM Defense Ratings) available for defensive rebounding and DJ happens to be pretty low there - probably for the reasons I mentioned. You can look it up here: http://www.gotbuckets.com/2015-ffapm-defense/

By the way, the same can be said about his blocks. Anyway, there was a great post by Dr Spacemen on the PC-board (among other good ones discussing this particular topic) in which he explains the issues with DJ in more detail. If you're interested, I can highly recommend it. http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=43485631#p43485631

Led the league in defensive win shares too, for whatever thats worth.

Not much. DWS is a stat based on box score numbers. Basically useless when it comes to evaluate true impact on defense, pretty deceiving in the case of DJ.

Not much to me - but he's also by far and away the most impactful defender on their team, which speaks to his help defense and ability to cover space. Man to man D though, he struggles. There's still room for improvement as far as overhelping goes, so he's by no means a finished product either.

He has the all the physical tools to become an elite defender, but I doubt his approach to defense changes anytime soon. But sure, there certainly is room for improvement.

By the way, I'm not saying he's not a capable defender. But he's not the great defender the raw numbers suggest and the media made out of him. While his offense tends to be underrated, because he doesn't have the usual skills to have an impact on that end, his defense tends to be overrated. For what it's worth, RAPM agrees in this case and while he's still not a negative defender, his ORAPM is clearly higher than his DRAPM (http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/RAPM_2015.html).

[migya]

If the team is to S&T for MGasol, they'll have to include Bogut as well as Barnes to Memphis. The best short term and long term option is MGasol, he'd fit the team straight away. The only player that may or may not be available is Anthony Davis, that's if he decides not to stay in NO, not sure if he's already committed to them or not. It'd take Bogut, Green and Klay for ADavis and Asik. Really is hard to want to change the team since they won so much this season but ADavis is probably the only player worth giving that much for.

[lars_rosenberg]

Anthony Davis is staying in New Orleans 7 years at least. No way they let him go.

[FNQ]

DJ led the NBA in rebound rate and defensive rebound rate. For every possible defensive rebound available while he was on court, he grabbed one of 3. How is that not elite, but finishing #5 in OREB elite?

Individual rebound numbers don't necessarily indicate his impact on the boards when we're talking about team-success in this area that can be attributed to him. He's chasing after every rebound and is horrible at boxing out, thus his individual numbers look great while the outcome for the team can be negative. There is regression data (FFAPM Defense Ratings) available for defensive rebounding and DJ happens to be pretty low there - probably for the reasons I mentioned. You can look it up here: http://www.gotbuckets.com/2015-ffapm-defense/

It doesn't really explain what FFAPM is or how it differs from RAPM. Its hard to say the guy who is grabbing one of out of every 3 missed shots, improving the team by a ridiculous 6.4% when he's on/off court (albeit only 1.1% on the defensive rebound end).. isn't an elite rebounder. Some players are team rebounders, some are rebound collectors.. he's a collector. I don't understand how any stat could rank him below the halfway point at rebounding considering nothing in any advanced stats points to him not helping the team.

By the way, the same can be said about his blocks. Anyway, there was a great post by Dr Spacemen on the PC-board (among other good ones discussing this particular topic) in which he explains the issues with DJ in more detail. If you're interested, I can highly recommend it. http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=43485631#p43485631

Amount of inside shots, and their %s, go way down when Jordan is on the floor. He's not deserving of DPOY or 1st team anything, but you can be overrated and still be pretty good. And Jordan is pretty good.

He has the all the physical tools to become an elite defender, but I doubt his approach to defense changes anytime soon. But sure, there certainly is room for improvement.

By the way, I'm not saying he's not a capable defender. But he's not the great defender the raw numbers suggest and the media made out of him. While his offense tends to be underrated, because he doesn't have the usual skills to have an impact on that end, his defense tends to be overrated. For what it's worth, RAPM agrees in this case and while he's still not a negative defender, his ORAPM is clearly higher than his DRAPM (http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/RAPM_2015.html).

RAPM splits are terrible and unreliable. I've broken that down a lot before.. that's why I always used synergy's O/D splits, and RAPM solely as an aggregate marker for player prediction. That said I'm not denying he's overrated defensively, but that doesn't mean he's still not one of the better defensive Cs and a guy who can capably anchor a defense. Definitely not the best like the media would have you believe, but are there 5 Cs in the league right now who you'd anchor a defense with over him? MGasol, Bogut, Howard... then it gets a lot dicier. Noah, Hibbert, Gobert, Whiteside are all in that tier.

[FNQ]

Disagree here too, to a degree. *Maybe* Steph wouldnt do as well. But their wouldnt be a vast transformation, where he would become a barely passable rotation player. Ditto Iguodala, Klay, Green, Bogut.. maybe Livingston and Speights, but their skills tend to translate a lot better due to their passing/handling and rebounding skills, respectively. But less talented players thrive on fit, and that's what we're seeing: a moderately talented player in Barnes who was used in the absolute worst way possible by a poor coach, now being used in what looks to be the best way possible by a great coach. But some fans would attribute Kerr's usage of Barnes as finite improvements in him that he can continue to build off of, in places that aren't here. And the #s say that that isn't true right now. Potential remains, but it's still unrealized right now, and the odds are currently against him moving far beyond what he is now.

Really? If that were so why do guys like even Lebron look to move to different teams in free agency (aside from money because Lebron has a taken a hit on that in order to play on a team which he thinks will complement him). And to play for a coach who they think will put together a good system and give his players the best chance to succeed? Why are we (every player to a man who was on this team last year) better than they were under MJ? It makes a heckuva lot of difference.

Perhaps the coaching has a lot more to do as well as game preparation in addition to a better system which has upped his (and everyone else on this teams) numbers? And why under these same coaches under this same system are you so sure he won't improve. A lot of guys make it to allstars who probably don't necessarily deserve it. Why is it not even possible that Barnes won't "luck in" and make it?He continues to improve, a lot of guys get injured on wind up in bad situations then it's very conceivable he can make it at some point.

- LeBron left because of fit, after winning several rings in Miami? I don't think so. In fact, I know that's not true. He left because he wanted to.

- coaches impact everything. But stars are always gonna be stars. Good players will always make an impact. But fringe players can look like crap in one system, utterly useless.. and then look like world beaters in others. Barnes looked useless in Jackson's isoball. That style of play is pretty common in the NBA. Like it or not, until he proves he can create for himself, Barnes is a + role player in a seldom used, pass-happy style of basketball. That may change considering the success of us and ATL, but currently most teams like to create mismatches one on one.

- when I talk about all-star, I talk about the caliber of the player, not the title itself. We could say former all-star David Lee all day long, but we know that he's a role player who was thrust into high volume. But Lee at least showed actual signs of being an efficient scoring big man throughout his career. Barnes has yet to go higher than 13 points per 36min yet, once. Even if Barnes gets a bogus AS appearance, he's still the same player. And frankly looking at his body of work and his skillset, I can't see why anyone would look at that and think future all-star. Or all-star caliber player, whichever one people are implying. Either one seems like a crazy stretch.

[East Bay Sports]

Anthony Davis is staying in New Orleans 7 years at least. No way they let him go.

He can become an UFA in two seasons if he wants

[The-Power]

It doesn't really explain what FFAPM is or how it differs from RAPM. Its hard to say the guy who is grabbing one of out of every 3 missed shots, improving the team by a ridiculous 6.4% when he's on/off court (albeit only 1.1% on the defensive rebound end).. isn't an elite rebounder. Some players are team rebounders, some are rebound collectors.. he's a collector. I don't understand how any stat could rank him below the halfway point at rebounding considering nothing in any advanced stats points to him not helping the team.

FFAPM - just as RAPM, which on top of it is also regularized - uses regression but it doesn't try to attempt to create one metric of overall impact. Instead, it focuses on separate factors as you can see. As you probably know, regression analysis tries to evaluate a player's true - not influenced by his teammates - impact. In other words: it tries to address the flaws of on-/off-court numbers. While advanced metrics like RAPM or FFAPM are far away from flawless and still noisy, there is a good reason why they are created - because on-/off-court numbers are even noisier. I don't think they are the be-all and end-all stats, but they give food for thought and should make us skeptical on how to look at raw numbers or unadjusted plus-minus data when the divergence is evident.

As I already stated, we have to differentiate between offensive rebounding and defensive rebounding. There's basically only one way to grab offensive boards frequently: crash the boards. No doubt he's great at it. On defense, however, crashing the boards will result in many grabbed individual rebounds but it can hurt your team. The reason for it is because you don't make use of your positional advantages and if you crash the board and don't get the rebound, there's a good chance the opponents get the rebound due to your mistake. That's why the differentiation between collectors and team rebounders is highly problematic. Defensive rebounding is a team effort and you are supposed to do whatever is best for your rebounding as a team. Sometimes it means grabbing the rebound, sometimes it means helping your teammates to grab the rebound by boxing out. The distinction you draw doesn't work in reality and I don't believe any coach endorses it for his team.

RAPM splits are terrible and unreliable. I've broken that down a lot before.. that's why I always used synergy's O/D splits, and RAPM solely as an aggregate marker for player prediction. That said I'm not denying he's overrated defensively, but that doesn't mean he's still not one of the better defensive Cs and a guy who can capably anchor a defense. Definitely not the best like the media would have you believe, but are there 5 Cs in the league right now who you'd anchor a defense with over him? MGasol, Bogut, Howard... then it gets a lot dicier. Noah, Hibbert, Gobert, Whiteside are all in that tier.

I'm fine with not trusting RAPM-splits, I do take them with a grain of salt as well. RAPM is the best all-in-one stat out there, but it's not perfect. That's why I'm first and foremost using context and rational reasoning. A list of players which are better than some other player isn't easy to make without spending hours and hours with researching and watching tape and I don't blame anyone for believing that DJ is a second-tier defensive C (as long as said person at least recognizes that he has no business in a DPOY discussion). I, personally, rank him a little bit lower but I do believe he's an above average defender.

That said, Gobert is better defensively than anyone not named Bogut and healthy Dwight and he's going to be the best defensive Center in the league soon - he's definitely a first-tier defensive C.

[migya]

Anthony Davis is staying in New Orleans 7 years at least. No way they let him go.

He can become an UFA in two seasons if he wants

He's a FA after next season, like Barnes and Ezeli, isn't he. Think NO should be smart and trade him this offseason if he doesn't resign but if he becomes FA next year, he'll probably go to the Lakers if they don't get capped out.

[East Bay Sports]

Anthony Davis is staying in New Orleans 7 years at least. No way they let him go.

He can become an UFA in two seasons if he wants

He's a FA after next season, like Barnes and Ezeli, isn't he. Think NO should be smart and trade him this offseason if he doesn't resign but if he becomes FA next year, he'll probably go to the Lakers if they don't get capped out.

He is a RFA after next season, or he can sign the QO and become an UFA after 2016-17.

[old rem]

I don't care how good you might be, but if you go to a team where the coach doesn't utilize you the best way possible, you're not going to do very well. So having a good coach, who knows how to coach use as well as where to use you and in what situation has a major impact on how you develop and what you are able to achieve.

Disagree. Curry was misused while Monta was here, he was still good. Klay and Green were misused by Jackson, and their talent and impact was still evident. Barnes went from total trash last year to good complementary piece.. and haven't teams done stuff like that with waiver wire pick ups? Guys who have failed terribly at one spot, only to be used in a better role elsewhere? So did Barnes all of a sudden become a midrange maven.. or was he just ushered away from isoball, where it highlighted his weaknesses as a player?

You take each of our players and disperse them to different teams, with different coaches and different players and I guarantee you that none of them likely do as well as they've done here. A lot of it also has to do of putting together the right mix of talent, players and coaching which is what has happened here. Even Steph wouldn't likely be able to do what he has for us this year under a different coach, a different system and different players which may not complement him as well.

Disagree here too, to a degree. *Maybe* Steph wouldnt do as well. But their wouldnt be a vast transformation, where he would become a barely passable rotation player. Ditto Iguodala, Klay, Green, Bogut.. maybe Livingston and Speights, but their skills tend to translate a lot better due to their passing/handling and rebounding skills, respectively. But less talented players thrive on fit, and that's what we're seeing: a moderately talented player in Barnes who was used in the absolute worst way possible by a poor coach, now being used in what looks to be the best way possible by a great coach. But some fans would attribute Kerr's usage of Barnes as finite improvements in him that he can continue to build off of, in places that aren't here. And the #s say that that isn't true right now. Potential remains, but it's still unrealized right now, and the odds are currently against him moving far beyond what he is now.

Right... CONTEXT is big..how the team/coach sees,uses,develops TALENT is HUGE. GSW has done it RIGHT..at last..after decades of being blind and foolish. We had DECADES where we did fine with guards, wings and the story ALWAYS was.. if they had big guys...... But.. we had coaches who ABANDONED whatever big guy we drafted or got. Nellie...especially. He was a missionary for "smallball" and he could sign up a wing from D League.. play him a major role while a top 10 pick big guy rots on the bench.

I feel SAD for a half dozen guys the Warrors ruined. By the time we traded off our lotto guy for "whatever"... he had been reprogrammed to be a spectator, a scrub. Forever.. the GM would think..we need a BIG MAN...the Coach ain't on the same page..his mindset is I need win now to keep a job or I can look good if we SCORE a lot. Have to figure Lacob etc wanted to change that. Jackson...brought a new POV. Kerr took it a step further.

To be a GREAT TEAM..... you need to get ALL the details right...you need to make the most of ALL opportunities..you need to be in balance.. have shoot /score and ALSO defense ,rebounds. You want ENERGY..CHEMISTRY.. TEAM game. After trying every bad option..FINALLY GSW did it right.

[turk3d]

Another thing you didn't mention: throughout all those years, defense seemed to be somewhat of an after thought especially under Nellie.

[ILOVEIT]

Making special trade thread since we don't seem to have one here

Warriors trade HB and Lee for NY's #4 pick.
Knicks need immediate help and can sell Lee to home fans and could look at HB as a young stud who could contribute right away. One more move for a legit point guard gets them right back in the playoffs in a weak East.

Warriors solve Cap issues near term and long term. They get a cheap young talent....

Bring in Ryan Anderson as some depth at stretch PF (Imagine him on the baseline instead of Harrison Barnes).

[ILOVEIT]

I could see is Maybe Bogut, Lee and Barnes for Cousins......IF Kings are in trouble and forced to trade Cousins. I think Cousins is probably a pretty solid guy who wants to win and just hasn't had the right leadership around him.

Big risk but Cousins, if right, makes the Warriors complete. Big time beast down low....talented....surrounded by great teammates..I think he buys in to the Championship goal and falls in line.

Imagine the Kings...suddenly with Bogut, Lee and Barnes...HUGE upgrade on the front line.....

[ChuckDurn]

They rightly locked this on the T&T board, before there'd be too much criticism.

On his own, Barnes might get you around the #10 pick, it seems.

Lee makes $15M, but produces at a rate well below that. Due to his contract, Lee is a significant liability in a trade.

Add them together, they're not worth anything approaching the #4.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[ChuckDurn]

I could see is Maybe Bogut, Lee and Barnes for Cousins......IF Kings are in trouble and forced to trade Cousins. I think Cousins is probably a pretty solid guy who wants to win and just hasn't had the right leadership around him.

Big risk but Cousins, if right, makes the Warriors complete. Big time beast down low....talented....surrounded by great teammates..I think he buys in to the Championship goal and falls in line.

Imagine the Kings...suddenly with Bogut, Lee and Barnes...HUGE upgrade on the front line.....

Again, you're unrealistic here. Lee has negative trade value, Bogut has very limited trade value due to his salary and penchant for being hurt or ineffective.....

Cousins is much better than Bogut, and Gay is much better than Barnes. How is that Bogut/Lee/Barnes frontline a huge upgrade, when Sacramento takes a step back at 2 of the 3 positions?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[ILOVEIT]

Hmmmm. Maybe.....I'll go on record that Knicks are desperate to build a team FAST...context matters. #4 pick means little to the Knicks if he can't help Mello win this year. IMO HB and Lee help get them back into the playoffs.

I think the real question is, what can Knicks get for #4 pick in actual players in a trade. Curious on anyone's thoughts on that.

[ILOVEIT]

I could see is Maybe Bogut, Lee and Barnes for Cousins......IF Kings are in trouble and forced to trade Cousins. I think Cousins is probably a pretty solid guy who wants to win and just hasn't had the right leadership around him.

Big risk but Cousins, if right, makes the Warriors complete. Big time beast down low....talented....surrounded by great teammates..I think he buys in to the Championship goal and falls in line.

Imagine the Kings...suddenly with Bogut, Lee and Barnes...HUGE upgrade on the front line.....

Again, you're unrealistic here. Lee has negative trade value, Bogut has very limited trade value due to his salary and penchant for being hurt or ineffective.....

Cousins is much better than Bogut, and Gay is much better than Barnes. How is that Bogut/Lee/Barnes frontline a huge upgrade, when Sacramento takes a step back at 2 of the 3 positions?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Agree..not a huge upgrade. But I thing you way over value Gay at this point in his career. Who has more value...a 22 year old with proven talent and upside....or an overpaid one way player past his prime. I don't think you can call Lee garbage and Gay having value when they are essentially the same type of one way player paid a lot and both past their prime.

And again....context. If Cousins wants out....and you Kings can get a legit starting center....a young talent in Barns....and a mid level talent in Lee... And I also think deals are made based on GM to GM and owner to owner relationships.....Obviously the Warriors have that. So maybe Warriors ad Ezeli....

[Onus]

I could see is Maybe Bogut, Lee and Barnes for Cousins......IF Kings are in trouble and forced to trade Cousins. I think Cousins is probably a pretty solid guy who wants to win and just hasn't had the right leadership around him.

Big risk but Cousins, if right, makes the Warriors complete. Big time beast down low....talented....surrounded by great teammates..I think he buys in to the Championship goal and falls in line.

Imagine the Kings...suddenly with Bogut, Lee and Barnes...HUGE upgrade on the front line.....

Again, you're unrealistic here. Lee has negative trade value, Bogut has very limited trade value due to his salary and penchant for being hurt or ineffective.....

Cousins is much better than Bogut, and Gay is much better than Barnes. How is that Bogut/Lee/Barnes frontline a huge upgrade, when Sacramento takes a step back at 2 of the 3 positions?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

As great as Cousins would be on this team, there's no way the FO breaks this team up for him. You don't break up a championship core until you see the flaws exposed. you rarely ever get a chance to repeat and you have to give these guys that chance. We're going back to back with the same core