Is this a correct statement?

[spearsy23]

And the point is simple. In any trade between a late 1st and an early 2nd the incentive has always gone to the team with the late 1st.

If you think Minnesota got too little in one trade, I think you probably aren't alone ...

Those trades haven't happened in the last five years. Show the value that is being gained by teams holding those late firsts. I posted all of the trades that involved primarily draft picks. Can you look at that list and honestly tell me that 25-30 are getting more value for their picks? Where is it coming from? We see similar nothing's being traded for both sets, the only difference being that the 'bads' are worse for 25-30.

There is not a single trade where I looked at your list and said, oh yeah, 2nds get more.

25th for cash is more value than moving up from 24 to 17, Tyler Zeller and Kelenna Azbuike?
2 future 2nd's for 32 isn't more than 46 and cash for 27?
25 for 38 and 54 isn't more than 26 and Lee for future 2nd and cash?

2 2nd's for 32 isn't the same as 27 for 45 and future 2nd?

[HartfordWhalers]

Those trades haven't happened in the last five years. Show the value that is being gained by teams holding those late firsts. I posted all of the trades that involved primarily draft picks. Can you look at that list and honestly tell me that 25-30 are getting more value for their picks? Where is it coming from? We see similar nothing's being traded for both sets, the only difference being that the 'bads' are worse for 25-30.

There is not a single trade where I looked at your list and said, oh yeah, 2nds get more.

25th for cash is more value than moving up from 24 to 17, Tyler Zeller and Kelenna Azbuike?
2 future 2nd's for 32 isn't more than 46 and cash for 27?
25 for 38 and 54 isn't more than 26 and Lee for future 2nd and cash?

2 2nd's for 32 isn't the same as 27 for 45 and future 2nd?

In every year, I don't see a single 2nd going for more than a first.

Some years 20-30 range is much much stronger than others. Thats not really a shocker.

In contrast, I have seen several trades wheee a late 1st gets early 2nd +++ that year...

[Bravenewworld]

Spearsy, i still dont understand why you are so obsessed with this idea that an early 2nd is worth more than a late 1st.
Even if we apply this idea of "stashing" players, its something that does not often work out. Which seems to be the basis for this theory you have, that we never actually see practiced.

[spearsy23]

In every year, I don't see a single 2nd going for more than a first.

Some years 20-30 range is much much stronger than others. Thats not really a shocker.

In contrast, I have seen several trades wheee a late 1st gets early 2nd +++ that year...

Then let's rank them. Feel free to tell me if you disagree.

2010-
1A. 27 sold for cash
1B. 31 sold for cash
-I think I'd call that a push

2011-
No 25-30's traded hands impossible to evaluate by your standard.

2012-
1. 33 and 34 traded to move from 24 to 17 and obtain Tyler Zeller and Kelenna Azbuike
2. 27 traded for two future 2nds
-Clearly 33 and 34 brought greater value

2013-
1. 29 and cash gets 26
2. 35 gets 38 and 54
3. 27 gets 46 and cash
4. 26 and Malcom Lee gets future 2nd and cash
-late firsts get the best return but also by far the worst.

2014-
I really don't know how to rank these because there were so many moving parts, feel free to rank them in whichever order you see fit and I'll accept it.

What I'm seeing is that a trade for early seconds brought the largest return, and a trade of a late first brought the worst. As a reminder, this thread was specifically brought about talking about picks 25-35 and talking about within the new CBA. I've conceded that they may not be worth more but value is generally equivalent, what am I missing?

[RufusTrufus]

It has some merit.

If we put a moderate value to players after 23#-24# the fact that an agent of a player of Pekovic´s pedigree can explain that his player will be unavailable to late first round suitors has more of an impact than the "look, we got some more bucks back than with the 2nd".

Some european player will repeat this same path in the future. If the stash to preserve roster spots and get further development wouldn´t be enough incentive, how do you expect MN or CHI to get Bjelica or Mirotic if they were 28#? Yes, they can wait three years for the player not to be bound to rookie scale but from a logistics POV the ability to have the salary attached went out of the window and it´s quite a time to wait, too.

Another factor is the difference of overall talent in the league through different spans of time. Teams are deeper now and that work both in favor and against of the late first round picks. You´re asking a guy fresh out of college to get the job out of the dead cold hands of a Lauvergne, Ingles, et cetera. A bottom dweller like MN has Bennett, with just two years of experience and some minors flashes, with one leg out of the door. Payne could be their 6th big the next year.

Of course there´s always the powerball ticket to a superstar but it´s also about opportunity. Ginobili, Marc Gasol are some of a long list of stashes. If even lottery guys can´t get regular PT- see above- the wait and see gets better. Specially when you consider the marked difference of level between NBDL and Euroleague.

[Cappy_Smurf]

I don't think this is as black and white as some. Obviously if you're talking about swapping pick for pick, 2nds don't hold more value. However, suppose you're going to gamble on a risky player with the 30th pick compared to the 31st pick, and that player doesn't work out. In that case, you're better off taking that player with the 31st pick, because you aren't locked into that player for as long or as much money.

[HartfordWhalers]

In every year, I don't see a single 2nd going for more than a first.

Some years 20-30 range is much much stronger than others. Thats not really a shocker.

In contrast, I have seen several trades wheee a late 1st gets early 2nd +++ that year...

Then let's rank them. Feel free to tell me if you disagree.

2010-
1A. 27 sold for cash
1B. 31 sold for cash
-I think I'd call that a push

2011-
No 25-30's traded hands impossible to evaluate by your standard.

2012-
1. 33 and 34 traded to move from 24 to 17 and obtain Tyler Zeller and Kelenna Azbuike
2. 27 traded for two future 2nds
-Clearly 33 and 34 brought greater value

2013-
1. 29 and cash gets 26
2. 35 gets 38 and 54
3. 27 gets 46 and cash
4. 26 and Malcom Lee gets future 2nd and cash
-late firsts get the best return but also by far the worst.

2014-
I really don't know how to rank these because there were so many moving parts, feel free to rank them in whichever order you see fit and I'll accept it.

What I'm seeing is that a trade for early seconds brought the largest return, and a trade of a late first brought the worst. As a reminder, this thread was specifically brought about talking about picks 25-35 and talking about within the new CBA. I've conceded that they may not be worth more but value is generally equivalent, what am I missing?

2010 - Would be great to have the cash each was sold for, might dig around and find that later.

2012 - You are showing: 33, 34 and eating $1,069,509 of dead weight salary to Azbuike (seems he was included on teh wrong side for the value) to move up from 24 to 17 as clearly better than:
27 traded for lotto protected 1st, if not becomes 2 2nds (seems you described this pretty misleadingly, as most people expected Philly to make the playoffs again back then). But even ignpring the absurd description, sicne you are using hindsight what were those 2nds? One is already 33.

So, basically you have another trade where there is 27 for 33 + future expected very high 2nd. This is kinda the point no?

And yeah, I take a lotto protected 1st for 1 pick as more valuable than eating 1m in dead money and just moving up 7 slots for 2 high 2nds.

2013: 46 and cash can definitely be a better return than 38 and 54. 54 is basically worthless, and usually goes for 2-400k. WOuld like to know the exact cash amounts before agreeing with your ranking at all here. (Same with Minnesota who also saved the 1m cap room that they needed to save that offseason).

If you ignore the value of cash, then sure, your ordering is fine. But that seems silly. Not as silly as the hijinks done with the 2012 though...

[tidho]

The pick itself is not more valuable, but in certain scenarios (like Cleveland this year) it is better for the team to have an early 2nd rather than a late 1st.