Karmaloop wrote:BBallFreak wrote:You're welcome to your opinion. I obviously feel you have the wrong idea. A team could do a hell of a lot worse than talking a couple of these guys, plus cap flexibility, for a disgruntled star.
The problem is the last few disgruntled stars (i.e. Anthony Davis, Paul George, etc.) all brought back players with SIGNIFICANTLY more production. In the Anthony Davis trade, the Pelicans got Brandon Ingram (18/5/3) and Lonzo Ball (10/5/5). In the most recent Paul George trade, the Thunder got SGA (11/3/3) and Gallinari (20/6/3). In the previous Kawhi Leonard deal, the Spurs got DeRozan (23/4/5). In the two most recent disgruntled stars, the Lakers and Clippers gave up a COMBINED 8 FRPs and 3 pick swaps. Miami can't even trade a FRP until 2025 at the very earliest. A package of Dragic/Leoanrd and your young players and a very distant FRP doesn't get you a disgruntled star IMO. It gets you that second tier star (i.e. DeMar DeRozan, Mike Conley, etc.) IMO.
Without talking about the overall value of this particular trade, I think a playerâ€™s fame is indeed a significant part of any trade. I like Bam, I like Winslow, but they are not well-known to the typical, less-informed couple that buy a pair of tickets for Friday Date Night. GMâ€™s not only need to do trades that help the team in talent or direction, but they need to win the press conference too, explaining why they traded a well-known star (even a guy like Chris Paul, with a highly negative contract) for a bunch of players that casual fans do not know. OKC has an advantage here, because Thunder fans donâ€™t have the attachment to their player that a star would have with several years playing for the home team. Presti did well in the Westbrook trade in both arenas - a big return for a negative contract, plus everyone knows Chris Paul.
EDIT: I wouldnâ€™t do the deal for MIA, but it may be impossible to get a return that OKC can accept. However, I could be under-estimating Presti, because I would have said the same about Westbrook.