RealGM

Alright, there's been a debate on the OKC board between a Pistons poster and OKC fans on the trade. The debate is the claim that OKC shouldn't have had to give a first to Utah, and Detroit should have, hence Detroit came out best in the deal. I'm starting a poll here as I'm hoping to get some non-biased input. For anyone unsure of details:

OKC Out: Perkins, Jackson, Jerrett, Pleiss, 2017 first (lotto protected), future second
In: Kanter, Augustin, Singler, Novak, Detroit second

Detroit Out: Singler, Augustin, second
In: Jackson

Utah Out: Kanter, Novak
In: Perkins, Jerrett, Pleiss, OKC first and second

Good sh* bondom

Blkbrd671 wrote:Good sh* bondom

Thanks.

I was shocked by how little Detroit had to give up, so yeah I think if anything they should have given a protected 1st instead of a 2nd.

Way I see it Kanter and RJ have very similar value and they are in very similar positions in free agency.

Thus..

Perkins, Jerrett, Pleiss, #1
for
Augustin, Singler, Novak

Seems like an overpay.

i think the poll might be f* up, its one of those, you have to remember what teh question is asking before you answer. lol so far poll has okc, thread has detroit

Blkbrd671 wrote:

Spoiler:

bondom34 wrote:Alright, there's been a debate on the OKC board between a Pistons poster and OKC fans on the trade. The debate is the claim that OKC shouldn't have had to give a first to Utah, and Detroit should have, hence Detroit came out best in the deal. I'm starting a poll here as I'm hoping to get some non-biased input. For anyone unsure of details:

OKC Out: Perkins, Jackson, Jerrett, Pleiss, 2017 first (lotto protected), future second
In: Kanter, Augustin, Singler, Novak, Detroit second

Detroit Out: Singler, Augustin, second
In: Jackson

Utah Out: Kanter, Novak
In: Perkins, Jerrett, Pleiss, OKC first and second

i think the poll might be f* up, its one of those, you have to remember what teh question is asking before you answer. lol so far poll has okc, thread has detroit

Don't know, will ask people to chime in please though, as TJ is the one neutral Detroit vote I assume, so don't know what's going on.

I was shocked Detroit got Jackson for almost essentially nothing. I think they should have given up a (protected) 1st, and OKC keep theirs.

I was a bit surprised Detroit got RJ quite *that* cheaply, but then other reports started coming out (and that's all I know; they were reports...maybe OKC fans can confirm or deny?). It's true that Kanter's agent did publicly ask for a trade, but apparently RJ was also openly grousing about it every day in practice, deliberately pounding the ball, freezing other players out, and basically being such a huge pain that he made himself un-keep-able.

In addition, leading up to the deadline, Kanter was actually playing quite well...and RJ really wasn't.

And third, given the above, everyone knew that RJ wasn't going to be re-signed by OKC, whereas Utah could still say "hey, maybe we'll work it out and keep Enes!" (even if that wasn't necessarily the plan). Utah had the leverage to demand a pick, and OKC didn't.

In the end, I *don't* think RJ had the same trade value as Kanter, and the trade itself would suggest the same.

A 24 yo backup pg who was a malcontent, playing poorly, wanted out and was losing minutes to Dion Waiters vs a 22 yo center who wanted out, was playing well, was playing hard and was losing minutes to Rudy Gobert. It's obvious who had more value. Detroit probably sucked some value from Utah, but that's Utah's problem and is irrelevant to OKC.

Trader_Joe wrote:I was shocked by how little Detroit had to give up, so yeah I think if anything they should have given a protected 1st instead of a 2nd.

Way I see it Kanter and RJ have very similar value and they are in very similar positions in free agency.

Thus..

Perkins, Jerrett, Pleiss, #1
for
Augustin, Singler, Novak

Seems like an overpay.

Agreed. I feel like Detroit absolutely fleeced on this deal.

I don't think Jackson's value was as high as Kanter's.

I think OKC has already 'won' the deal, in that Kanter seems to be a good fit, and is going to contribute to a playoff team. That said, if Jackson ends up staying with DET and being a capable starter, they got a steal of a deal.

Im still amazed by everyone who thinks Jackson is a particularly good player or more importantly had particularly high trade value. He was a malcontent, showed that when given the team to run he clearly wasn't up to the task, was about to be an RFA and had already rejected an enormous contract.

I think Augustin is every bit the player he is plus they gave up a cheap rotation guy in Singler and a 2nd. They certainly didn't steal anything imo.

People got caught in the name and not the performance. Kinda like when Cleveland stole so much value in the Waiters deal.

Foshan wrote:I don't think Jackson's value was as high as Kanter's.

I think OKC has already 'won' the deal, in that Kanter seems to be a good fit, and is going to contribute to a playoff team. That said, if Jackson ends up staying with DET and being a capable starter, they got a steal of a deal.

I would have put Jackson's not just equal, but higher.

Chuck Texas wrote:Im still amazed by everyone who thinks Jackson is a particularly good player or more importantly had particularly high trade value. He was a malcontent, showed that when given the team to run he clearly wasn't up to the task, was about to be an RFA and had already rejected an enormous contract.

I think Augustin is every bit the player he is plus they gave up a cheap rotation guy in Singler and a 2nd. They certainly didn't steal anything imo.

People got caught in the name and not the performance. Kinda like when Cleveland stole so much value in the Waiters deal.

Eh, I said that was awful for OKC at the time. RJ has shown some very good skills. Waiters hasn't. Very very different.

No way Jackson should have had more value than Kanter. Just absolutely no way. Kanter is the better player plus he's a big. You can find inefficient small guards who fancy themselves a first option without any problems at all.

I think that for what OKC received the 1st was fair value. But I think Det should have given the other 2nd round pick instead of OKC.

HartfordWhalers wrote:

Foshan wrote:I don't think Jackson's value was as high as Kanter's.

I think OKC has already 'won' the deal, in that Kanter seems to be a good fit, and is going to contribute to a playoff team. That said, if Jackson ends up staying with DET and being a capable starter, they got a steal of a deal.

I would have put Jackson's not just equal, but higher.

Chuck Texas wrote:Im still amazed by everyone who thinks Jackson is a particularly good player or more importantly had particularly high trade value. He was a malcontent, showed that when given the team to run he clearly wasn't up to the task, was about to be an RFA and had already rejected an enormous contract.

I think Augustin is every bit the player he is plus they gave up a cheap rotation guy in Singler and a 2nd. They certainly didn't steal anything imo.

People got caught in the name and not the performance. Kinda like when Cleveland stole so much value in the Waiters deal.

Eh, I said that was awful for OKC at the time. RJ has shown some very good skills. Waiters hasn't. Very very different.

This surprises me actually too. From OKC fans, he;s just ok, and has played poorly this year. TBH he had a great game against Memphis in the playoffs, and gained an unearned rep for it.

I thought Detroit gave up too much for RJ and Utah got too little for Kanter. From the little i've seen of him, i thought Jackson was terrible. He holds the ball way too long for a PG, and chucks up bad shots. I figured my very little sample size was skewing my opinion on him based on just about everyone on here loving him.

Kanter is a skilled big that doesnt play much D, but his size gave the W's issues. I thought he was a great pickup for OKC. Even taking him out of the deal... Augustine, Novak, and Singler IMO are better for OKC than Jackson (i guess i'm a hater. I just don't like PGs that hold the ball too much an inefficiently chuck.) Perkins is a rotation big but provides nothing but size. I know nothing about the other two kids the Thunder traded.

The thunder made out like bandits in this trade as is. Great trade for them.

The Pistons got Jackson. Hopefully he'll do well for them, but i think they lost the trade.

I would have put Kanter's value higher than RJ's, but then I'm a Jazz homer

play this season - Kanter by a bit
attitude this season - Kanter by a mile
age - Kanter by two years
positional demand - Kanter by several inches
contract - push

There really aren't health issues for either guy, so the only thing left is upside...you'd have to think a *lot* more of RJ's than Kanter's (despite the age difference) in order to not give the overall value edge to Kanter. That's how I saw it, anyway.

(But as I said, I'm still surprised Detroit got RJ for quite that cheap.)

FYI, the Pistons saw OKC Jackson Friday. That was what we saw all year, and why Augustin is great for the Thunder.

bondom34 wrote:FYI, the Pistons saw OKC Jackson Friday. That was what we saw all year, and why Augustin is great for the Thunder.

3 game into the season, coming off 2 great performances against 2 elite guards in the league. Just saying, we knew we weren't gettin a finished product. I guess i can wait til DJ has his horrid game, but i don't feel its worth a mention, i don't think any player is great all th e time.