RGM's Top 25 most valuable players - vote for #9

[Narf]

Disagree. I think if you gave teams the choice between:

a) the superstar who is still one of the top 5-8 players in the game and one of the biggest draws in the world, or
b) a good-to-very-good player and the appropriate amount of capspace

that most teams would still take a) most of the time. That's how I look at it, anyway.

I believe the votes will be a pretty clear indicator of how many people agree with you.

Vote Aldridge
Nominate Irving (hard choice here)

[loserX]

Disagree. I think if you gave teams the choice between:

a) the superstar who is still one of the top 5-8 players in the game and one of the biggest draws in the world, or
b) a good-to-very-good player and the appropriate amount of capspace

that most teams would still take a) most of the time. That's how I look at it, anyway.

I believe the votes will be a pretty clear indicator of how many people agree with you.

I'm sure they will But let's keep in mind that what is true of FANS (which is all this survey is) is not necessarily true in the world of actual basketball executives, either. Youth and potential in particular are often overrated by fans.

That said, I don't claim to be "right", either...we won't know for certain unless these guys actually get traded, so we can compare results. Just saying how I feel for the purposes of debate.

[Narf]

I don't think your view is unreasonable, but give the posters here some credit. LMA is a pretty damn good player. He's carrying Portland better than Kobe would IMO. After LMA it's Glass Wallace and Wes Matthews as Portland's #2/#3 options. Now add in age and contract and is Kobe really better?

Us "fans" are as good as you at figuring out what a GM would do. Outside of LA I have to think most people would take LMA over Kobe going forward. And I think most GMs (but not all) would too.

[Guy986]

Vote: LaMarcus Aldridge
Nominate: Eric Gordon

Kobe is due to make over $30 mil in 2013-14.

Yes, he brings in a lot of money in LA, but how many teams can afford that big a cap hit, and build a team around him at age 33? I think he has a lot of value to the Lakers, not as much to many other teams.

Disagree. I think if you gave teams the choice between:

a) the superstar who is still one of the top 5-8 players in the game and one of the biggest draws in the world, or
b) a good-to-very-good player and the appropriate amount of capspace

that most teams would still take a) most of the time. That's how I look at it, anyway.

Money is one factor. But main factor is age.

Guys like Love, Aldridge are looking to play another 10 years in the league at a high level. Kobe, Dirk, Duncan have maybe 2 years left in their superstar prime. After that they're going to see a huge decline.

[loserX]

I don't think your view is unreasonable, but give the posters here some credit. LMA is a pretty damn good player. He's carrying Portland better than Kobe would IMO. After LMA it's Glass Wallace and Wes Matthews as Portland's #2/#3 options. Now add in age and contract and is Kobe really better?

Us "fans" are as good as you at figuring out what a GM would do. Outside of LA I have to think most people would take LMA over Kobe going forward. And I think most GMs (but not all) would too.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I apologize if I was coming across as saying otherwise. I understand the points that are being made, I just don't agree with them, myself.

It's just my own personal belief that when you have a chance to get a superstar, you get the superstar, and I think most owners and GMs feel the same way. (You sort the roster stuff out later.) It gives you the better chance to win a championship and it certainly makes you more money.

There are exceptions, sure. At some point, Kobe definitely will be worth less than Kevin Love. Same with Dirk and Aldridge. But I don't think we're there yet.

And I still have trouble with the notion that Love-plus-capspace or Aldridge-plus-capspace is worth more than a superstar. I just don't think that's true.

[Guy986]

I don't think your view is unreasonable, but give the posters here some credit. LMA is a pretty damn good player. He's carrying Portland better than Kobe would IMO. After LMA it's Glass Wallace and Wes Matthews as Portland's #2/#3 options. Now add in age and contract and is Kobe really better?

Us "fans" are as good as you at figuring out what a GM would do. Outside of LA I have to think most people would take LMA over Kobe going forward. And I think most GMs (but not all) would too.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I apologize if I was coming across as saying otherwise. I understand the points that are being made, I just don't agree with them, myself.

It's just my own personal belief that when you have a chance to get a superstar, you get the superstar, and I think most owners and GMs feel the same way. (You sort the roster stuff out later.) It gives you the better chance to win a championship and it certainly makes you more money.

There are exceptions, sure. At some point, Kobe definitely will be worth less than Kevin Love. Same with Dirk and Aldridge.But I don't think we're there yet.

And I still have trouble with the notion that Love-plus-capspace or Aldridge-plus-capspace is worth more than a superstar. I just don't think that's true.

I believe that point will happen sooner rather than later. Traditionally superstars lose their "stardom" at age 33-36. Thats when you see major decline happen.

Take a look at some of the greatest of all time. After their last prime year, there is a sharp decline in production. They either retire or they go from superstar to super expensive role player.

Shaq's last superstar year was 05-06 when he averaged 20/9 with a PER of 24.4. He was 33.

Hakeem's last superstar year was 98-99 when he averaged 19/9.6 with a PER of 23. He was 36.

Duncan's last superstar year was 09-10 when he averaged 18/10 with a PER of 24. He was 33.

Bird's last superstar year was 91-92 when he averaged 20/9.6 with a PER of 21. He was 35.

Jordan's last superstar year was 97-98 when he averaged 29/6 with a PER of 25. He was 34.


Kobe and Dirk are both 33. If history is any indication, their inevitable decline is going to happen very soon. It depends on if you would rather have all star production for next 10+ years or super star production for next 2-4 years.

[lukekarts]

Vote: Aldridge
Nominate: Irving

[lukekarts]

A quick note on Kobe - in my personal opinion his trade value is offset by his contract. It's not that his contract is really bad or anything, it's just that being able to send out enough salary to the Lakers of the right level of talent without totally screwing your team over makes it very difficult. Off the top of my head I can't think of a trade proposal that the team receiving Kobe would come out of it as competitive as before, that would still work for LA.

[babyjax13]

Kobe
Gordon

[Trader_Joe]

V: LMA
N: Irving

[Solid]

Kobe
Hibbert

[HartfordWhalers]

A quick note on Kobe - in my personal opinion his trade value is offset by his contract. It's not that his contract is really bad or anything, it's just that being able to send out enough salary to the Lakers of the right level of talent without totally screwing your team over makes it very difficult. Off the top of my head I can't think of a trade proposal that the team receiving Kobe would come out of it as competitive as before, that would still work for LA.

I definitely don't think Kobe is a midseason trade, oops things are going as planned, lets shop Kobe. And not that matching isn't still there, but during the offseason it would be much much easier.

I.e. Paul George, Hansborough, 2 1sts, and a 20 million TPE (and they just don't sign West) for Kobe.Or add in Foster and Rush's expirings and they even have the $ for West.

Gordon, Minnesota 1st, Aminu, Kaman, and Bledsoe (would have to check but I think they could still even get Butler, if not just tack in Foye as an expiring).

Do you think the Clippers don't pull the trigger on that Kobe offer if Chris Paul wasn't there and the Lakers were somehow interested in trading Kobe within town? I think they sign that offer immediately, and yes, I sweetened the Paul deal with the un-includable Bledsoe.

[loserX]

Kobe and Dirk are both 33. If history is any indication, their inevitable decline is going to happen very soon. It depends on if you would rather have all star production for next 10+ years or super star production for next 2-4 years.

But you don't get Aldridge for 10+ years. His contract runs out in 2015. You get Aldridge for 4 years and then you have Bird rights, which are nice but which guarantee nothing. (If the last few years have shown us anything, it's that if a star player wants to leave, he'll find a way to leave )

So it's not two years of Dirk vs. ten years of Aldridge. It's two years of Dirk vs. FOUR years of Aldridge with a slightly increased possibility of anything beyond that. And that's not nearly so clear-cut to me.

Anyway, despite how it appears, I actually don't like taking over whole threads So I'll try not to do that here.

[Malapropism]

Vote: Westbrook
Nom: Monroe

[Swimmer]

LMA
Gordon

I agree that Kobe should be coming up very soon -- he more than makes up for his salary via marketing revenues. How much of this comes from being/having been in LA? Would he make up for his salary for the remainder of his contract if he were sent to Minnesota or Milwaukee or something, particularly if his team stopped winning after having to gut their team for him? Plus, you know 100% he's gone at the end of his contract, unlike, as I mentioned before, someone like Love.

[Narf]

Gordon, Minnesota 1st, Aminu, Kaman, and Bledsoe (would have to check but I think they could still even get Butler, if not just tack in Foye as an expiring

That is an awful, awful trade. There is no way they trade that much for 3 years of Kobe.

Further more, New Orleans would rather have Gordon than Kobe. They want a young, cheap player to rebuild with and some high picks. Small and medium market teams are trying to follow OKC's model and trade their star for picks and a good young player.

Now, if Kobe was Chris Paul's age then yes. But Kobe is older than KG was when he was traded. His value is half what it would have been 3 years ago.

JMO though.

[HartfordWhalers]

Gordon, Minnesota 1st, Aminu, Kaman, and Bledsoe (would have to check but I think they could still even get Butler, if not just tack in Foye as an expiring

That is an awful, awful trade. There is no way they trade that much for 3 years of Kobe.

Further more, New Orleans would rather have Gordon than Kobe. They want a young, cheap player to rebuild with and some high picks. Small and medium market teams are trying to follow OKC's model and trade their star for picks and a good young player.

Now, if Kobe was Chris Paul's age then yes. But Kobe is older than KG was when he was traded. His value is half what it would have been 3 years ago.

JMO though.

I agree that this year it would make zero sense for NOH to do that. However, I was referencing LAC making that trade last summer. Thus the signing Butler comment, including Bledsoe, and possibly Foye. And the color:

Do you think the Clippers don't pull the trigger on that Kobe offer if Chris Paul wasn't there and the Lakers were somehow interested in trading Kobe within town? I think they sign that offer immediately, and yes, I sweetened the Paul deal with the un-includable Bledsoe.

So again, I definitely do think LAC would have done that, assuming Paul wasn't an option to not muddle this with a Paul versus Kobe trade debate.

[kdawg32086]

I don't buy the argument of Aldridge not being as valuable as Kobe or Dirk because they're superstars. If he was playing in NY, LA, Chicago, or Dallas instead of Portland he would be considered a superstar without question.

[shrink]

Kobe's "no trade" clause also limits his value to GM's, tying their hands on 40% of their payroll.

[NirvanaFC]

Vote: Andrew Bynum
Nominate: Kyrie Irving