RealGM

Sadly this debate has reared its head in multiple threads on the board today. So as a public service, I'd like the board to weigh in. I believe in the collective wisdom of crowds.

Chandler, barely. Superior player now, somehow less of a health risk(!), and contract certainty going forward. But this is not meant to paint Noel as low-value.

However, this is going to depend highly on the immediate prospects for success and the cap situation of the team looking to acquire one or the other.

Depends on your situation. If you are a team with a short window in which to win, I would take Chandler. He's a better player right now and will help you more.

If you can afford to be patient with Noel and build with him, you take Noel.

All things being equal, which they never are, I would take Chandler. Better player and even if he's a mess the last year of his deal, Noel is still going to get paid considerably more over a longer period of time.

Noel by a mile IMO. Now fit matters per team, but pure objective value, Noel easy

Chandler is even less healthy on avg. than Noel. Factor in AGE and Current contract it has to be NOEL.

Noel and I don't have to think for a second.

Smitty731 wrote:Depends on your situation. If you are a team with a short window in which to win, I would take Chandler. He's a better player right now and will help you more.

If you can afford to be patient with Noel and build with him, you take Noel.

All things being equal, which they never are, I would take Chandler. Better player and even if he's a mess the last year of his deal, Noel is still going to get paid considerably more over a longer period of time.

Exactly my thought. Totally depends on the team situation for who has more value.

What the &%$@ ? Not even sure Chandler is positive value.

I may be on my own but I take Tyson when you consider all options.

Noel is getting way more than 10 million per next off-season just bc of the way the CBA works these days. That's all off pretty much potential. He put up decent #'s during the 2 years he actually played, but nothing spectacular.

Considering I'm about to pay him almost twice as much on potential(with Injury/character problems), I'll go with Tyson.

Just so you know Tysons last two games: 14 and 21 / 13 and 23. You don't put up these #'s if you are past your prime. He can still play where Noel is all potential. Noel has never came close to grabbing 20+ rebounds in his life. Tyson just did it in back to back games.

I'll have to pay Tyson 13 million per over the next 2. Noel will get probably 55-60 over 3. Almost 20 per.

I feel over the next 2 years I'll get more value per contract with Tyson than you guys will over the next 3 with Noel....if he plays

Phoenix passing on Noel in return for Chandler would be pretty interesting.

Smitty731 wrote:Depends on your situation. If you are a team with a short window in which to win, I would take Chandler. He's a better player right now and will help you more.

If you can afford to be patient with Noel and build with him, you take Noel.

All things being equal, which they never are, I would take Chandler. Better player and even if he's a mess the last year of his deal, Noel is still going to get paid considerably more over a longer period of time.

Nails it.

Playoff teams take Chandler, non playoff teams take Noel.

Smitty was pretty much spot on. It depends on the situation and the size of the teams window.

If a team is a playoff contender, then Chandler is the man for you. Even at his age, he is still a defensive presence in the paint and is currently a top 5 rebounder in the league (12 rebounds a game in 28 minutes). We dont really know much about his offensive game, as we dont have plays for him and most of his points come from putbacks from rebounds.

Noel on the other hand might be better for younger teams either in the bottom of the league or rebuilding. Still young (but injury riddled), he still has the potential to be Tyson Chandler version 2.0 (IF he can ever stay healthy). A team looking at Noel will definitely be taking a gamble as he is on an expiring contract and will more than likely be looking for a bit more than Chandler is getting ($10M).

But even then, if i was a younger team, maybe even with a young C bursting with potential, i still might take Chandler over Noel due in part of his leadership and having my youngster learn from a standout defender. If they have at least half a brain, they should be able to picks things up from battling against him in practice and to learn from him. Thats what we were hoping from Len, but he only has a quarter of a brain, and therefor is adept from retaining anything........or is just lazy, who knows.

Now as a Suns fan, i think they really should take a shot on Noel. Our medical staff is known league wide for what we can do and have done, and i think Chandler could help elevate Noel under his tutelage and make him a better player. I do know that our staff red flagged Noel during the draft, and we decided to take Len over Noel, but i think that Noel still has potential and could still be a serviceable player in the right system.....if he can stay healthy.

I think it's pretty sensible that win-now teams will prefer the win-now player, and win-later teams will take the prospect.

The real question is: if both players hit the market at the same time (and hypothetically *had* to be traded), which one would pull the better offer?

Noel and I don't care what the situation is. Trade value is done in a vacuum, not be situation.

It really depends how much Noel is going to get this summer. At this point I really have no idea.

Say you trade for Noel, he plays well for you for three months, and consequently, someone throws a max or near-max offer at him. You match. Then, in the first season, he goes down with either his third ACL tear or one of the many other types of injury that have plagued him throughout his career. And as he sits there on the bench, not throwing the fans any bones, apparently peddling a questionable influence on teammates and the community, you wonder:

Would I rather have Tyson Chandler at half the price?

That's certainly a possibility any GM would have to consider in making this decision.

Wouldn't Noel need a second Acl tear before he got a third one?

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:Noel by a mile IMO. Now fit matters per team, but pure objective value, Noel easy

Agreed. Youth matters. Obviously, his contract is going to be a thing, but so is Chandler's age. If I'm a contender, let's face it, I already have a better center than either guy (unless I'm Golden State) so I'm looking for that reserve big to come in and change the game. I'm going for Noel. If I'm a young team, I'm going for Noel. Very few, specific scenarios would make Chandler the smarter choice, but very very few (including Golden State). This is just very clearly Noel, IMO...

By the way, I question whether a contender would actually prefer Chandler. When looking at defensive player tracking data, DRPM, and the team's defensive ratings when the player is on the court, the numbers come out in favor of Noel over the past two full seasons. Given normal aging curves, I would expect more defense from Noel than Chandler to certainly continue. That said, Chandler is a great rebounder so for teams desperate for that he does offer that.

Kerrsed wrote:If a team is a playoff contender, then Chandler is the man for you. Even at his age, he is still a defensive presence in the paint and is currently a top 5 rebounder in the league (12 rebounds a game in 28 minutes). We dont really know much about his offensive game, as we dont have plays for him and most of his points come from putbacks from rebounds.

.

Tyson Chandler doesn't really have a scoring game to speak of. No post moves, limited range, etc....

But, he's an extremely smart offensive player. Very good screen man, great finisher on the PNR, good offensive rebounder, understands spacing and how not to interfere with where the main scorers want to operate. He's led the league in ortg 4 or 5 times in his career. He's an underrated offensive player because he's not a scorer. But he does lots of little things that help an offense succeed. And he did this in New Orleans, in Dallas (both go-arounds), and in New York.