Piston Assets Rated

Laimbeer · Post #1 » by **Laimbeer** » Wed Aug 3, 2016 1:17 pm

Interesting site.

http://nbaassets.com/

1 Andre Drummond 4 yrs/$98.4M, $28.8M PO 2020
2 Stanley Johnson Rookie contract; $5.3M QO 2019
3 Kentavious Caldwell-Pope Rookie contract; $5M QO 2017
4 Reggie Jackson 4 yrs/$66.1M
5 Marcus Morris 3 yrs/$15M
6 Tobias Harris 3 yrs/$48M
7 DET 2018 1st
8 DET 2019 1st
9 DET 2020 1st
10 DET 2021 1st
11 DET 2022 1st
12 DET 2023 1st
13 Henry Ellenson DET 2016 1st (18)
14 DET 2017 1st
15 Boban Marjanovic 3 yrs/$21M
16 Jon Leuer Report: signed 4 yrs/$42M
17 Aron Baynes $6.5M 2016, $6.5M PO 2017
18 Dariun Hilliard Rookie contract; $1.3M QO 2018
19 Michael Gbinije DET 2016 2nd (49); Report: signed 3 yrs
20 Reggie Bullock $2.3M 2016, $3.3M QO 2017
21 DET 2018 2nd
22 Worse of (Best: CLE, HOU, or ORL 2019 2nd) or POR 2019 2nd
23 DET 2021 2nd
24 DET 2022 2nd
25 DET 2023 2nd
26 Ray McCallum Report: 1 yr min
27 Ish Smith Report: signed 3 yrs/$18M
28 Anthony Tolliver UFA (Early Bird)
29 Steve Blake UFA (Early Bird)
30 Lorenzo Brown 1 yr/$1M (NG)
31 Josh Smith OWED: 4 yrs/$21.3M (SP)

Post #2 » by **Snakebites** » Wed Aug 3, 2016 1:30 pm

Why is the 2017 pick rated the worst of our first rounders?

Are we projected to get worse after this year? Or is it just the general uncertainty that means later picks COULD be good?

I'd have thought Baynes as a possible expiring might be worth more. Guess they aren't assuming an opt out.

Kilo · Post #3 » by **Kilo** » Wed Aug 3, 2016 2:56 pm

Writer really hates Ish Smith.

Laimbeer · Post #4 » by **Laimbeer** » Wed Aug 3, 2016 3:17 pm

Snakebites wrote:Why is the 2017 pick rated the worst of our first rounders?

Are we projected to get worse after this year? Or is it just the general uncertainty that means later picks COULD be good?

I'd have thought Baynes as a possible expiring might be worth more. Guess they aren't assuming an opt out.

I saw that on several teams. I think if you're currently pretty good it's seen as better to wait for a future year in which you may not be. I know I'd take OKC's 2018 over their 2017.

tmorgan · Post #5 » by **tmorgan** » Wed Aug 3, 2016 3:58 pm

Cool spreadsheet/site, but there's some weird stuff on there...

Tristan Thompson's contract as a top 50 asset? That's crazy.
Compiler obviously likes Clint Capela a ton to put his rookie deal in the top 50. I like him, but that's nuts.

hoophabit · Post #6 » by **hoophabit** » Wed Aug 3, 2016 4:56 pm

I suppose I should be careful of appearing the homer, but this ranking really does seem disrespectful of Ish. I know, he's not a good shooter. He's managed to stick in the NBA since 2010? Guy throws a pretty good number of assists and can take the ball wherever he wants?

The Piston signing gives Ish financial security and standing as a player who has to some degree arrived. if SVG can convince him to limit his shots to only the best looks, and mostly concern himself with moving the defense around and getting his teammates better shots, this year's first FA signing might prove the headiest for 'Van Bower.' Has to be better than last year's backups in terms of PG play?

You can put it in spreadsheets but these results aren't arithmetic. In the end it's just some guys opinion, even if it's how you wrote the formula. I agree with a lot of it, and differ in others.

Moses ShamMoses · Post #7 » by **Moses ShamMoses** » Wed Aug 3, 2016 5:28 pm

How is Steve Blake more valuable than Lorenzo Brown?? I agree with what people said about Ish Smith. I think he gets grouped just below Boban and Leuer in reality. Also, Reggie Jackson is probably more valuable than Stanley Johnson I would think at this point. You could probably swap their spots.

DocRI · Post #8 » by **DocRI** » Wed Aug 3, 2016 6:58 pm

I thought teams weren't allowed to trade picks that were more than five years out, no? If so, those 2022 and 2023 picks shouldn't even be listed, as they're not assets yet.

But yeah, the whole ranking of picks seems goofy to me, too.

Post #9 » by **Snakebites** » Thu Aug 4, 2016 12:52 am

DocRI wrote:I thought teams weren't allowed to trade picks that were more than five years out, no? If so, those 2022 and 2023 picks shouldn't even be listed, as they're not assets yet.

But yeah, the whole ranking of picks seems goofy to me, too.

Yes, this.

Quirks aside I think there is some value to the rankings of our players. I just don't really understand why the picks are placed the way they are. I'm open minded though.

Pharaoh · Post #10 » by **Pharaoh** » Thu Aug 4, 2016 2:59 am

How is KCP, entering RFA with a booming cap a more valuable asset than RJ, Harris & Morris?

All of them are starters but 3 are locked into reasonable/good/insane deals while KCP could end up getting paid more than Harris & Mook combined!

tmorgan · Post #11 » by **tmorgan** » Thu Aug 4, 2016 5:25 am

They're trying to factor in years of team control, and since 99% of RFA don't take the QO and just re-sign, that increases value.

I do agree that KCP is going to get paid more than he's worth, but this is looked at from a market perspective. SG as a whole is a weak position, so it takes less to be valuable.

Mook, at least, should be above KCP, though. 3/15 for an average SF is better than 5/90+ for an average SG.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums