RealGM

This requires a 3rd team, fill in the blanks as you like

Minnesota out: unprotect the 1-5 protected 2029 first, Terrance Shannon Jr, and Leonard Miller.
Minnesota in: Walker Kessler

Utah out: Walker Kessler, ?
Utah in: improved Wolves 2029 first, either Leonard Miller or Terrance Shannon, ?

3rd team out ?
3rd team in: either Terrance Shannon Jr, and Leonard Miller.

Fully in protecting a future pick could be very valuable to Utah, and getting TSJ (a recent first,) is close to a full first in value. In the alternative they could have Miller. Whichever one they don’t want becomes trade value for Utah and a 3rd team.

Wolves cant aggregate/need to send out someone that makes more than kessler

And just removing the protections on a pick that lightly protected isn't going to get this done. How can McDaniels be worth 2 quality starters and 2 unprotected firsts and Kessler is only worth removing protections on an already owed pick?

Texas Chuck wrote:And just removing the protections on a pick that lightly protected isn't going to get this done. How can McDaniels be worth 2 quality starters and 2 unprotected firsts and Kessler is only worth removing protections on an already owed pick?

I never said McDaniels is worth that, I said that is the kind of cannot say no deal that it takes to get us to give him up. Why would we sell low on a 24 year all NBA defense player who has multiple 20 point playoff games last season?

1-5 protection isn’t light. The whole point for Utah is to try and hit the lotto. 5 draft years out is a long time. One injury to Ant and they might win the lottery. Utah wants unprotected firsts, that is what they would be getting in 2029. As for Shannon, he isn’t value less, nor is Miller.

Godaddycurse wrote:Wolves cant aggregate/need to send out someone that makes more than kessler

You’re right, my bad. It would take NAW going out to bring Kessler in.

winforlose wrote:This requires a 3rd team, fill in the blanks as you like

Minnesota out: unprotect the 1-5 protected 2029 first, Terrance Shannon Jr, and Leonard Miller.
Minnesota in: Walker Kessler

Utah out: Walker Kessler, ?
Utah in: improved Wolves 2029 first, either Leonard Miller or Terrance Shannon, ?

3rd team out ?
3rd team in: either Terrance Shannon Jr, and Leonard Miller.

Fully in protecting a future pick could be very valuable to Utah, and getting TSJ (a recent first,) is close to a full first in value. In the alternative they could have Miller. Whichever one they don’t want becomes trade value for Utah and a 3rd team.

That won't move the needle from Utah's perspective. Not remotely.

I don’t think the role being Rudy is worry investing what Kessler should cost. Maybe try to get lucky and draft Rudy’s replacement with a late pick. If not… Just deal with it in 2-3 years.

I don’t think Utah does this though obviously though.

Has anyone read any research on the value of protected picks at various levels?

I can’t verify this number, but I think I read something that like half of the All NBA players historically have come from the first five picks in the draft. So unprotecting picks clearly has “some” value, because finding a future All NBA player in the draft is the true win.

However, I don’t know how you’d calculate the additional value. First there’s the randomness of the future and lottery vs control of whether a team competes that can always be altered depending on pick protections, so the odds aren’t fair. Plus many pick protections roll forward to future years if they don’t hit. So often you don’t need the protections off to get something eventually.

So the pick is often a bird in the hand, which you wouldn’t lose, but might become an eagle in the hand?

If anyone knows of research in this area, can you point me to it? I have a valuation formula for combining two picks, but I’d love to see valuations for protected picks, and play with those numbers a little.

shrink wrote:Has anyone read any research on the value of protected picks at various levels?

I can’t verify this number, but I think I read something that like half of the All NBA players historically have come from the first five picks in the draft. So unprotecting picks clearly has “some” value, because finding a future All NBA player in the draft is the true win.

However, I don’t know how you’d calculate the additional value. First there’s the randomness of the future and lottery vs control of whether a team competes that can always be altered depending on pick protections, so the odds aren’t fair. Plus many pick protections roll forward to future years if they don’t hit. So often you don’t need the protections off to get something eventually.

So the pick is often a bird in the hand, which you wouldn’t lose, but might become an eagle in the hand?

If anyone knows of research in this area, can you point me to it? I have a valuation formula for combining two picks, but I’d love to see valuations for protected picks, and play with those numbers a little.

That would be a fascinating read if it exists.

Regarding this trade specifically, I don’t think Danny Ainge is the type of guy that would make this trade until it’s closer to the date, and he has a better idea if that pick will pay off. There is a good chance that removing the protections turns out to be worth nothing, but if it pays off big. This seems more like a Presti type of deal, who has so many other picks to absorb any loss of value.

I like the innovative thinking though, winforlose.

shrink wrote:Has anyone read any research on the value of protected picks at various levels?

I can’t verify this number, but I think I read something that like half of the All NBA players historically have come from the first five picks in the draft. So unprotecting picks clearly has “some” value, because finding a future All NBA player in the draft is the true win.

However, I don’t know how you’d calculate the additional value. First there’s the randomness of the future and lottery vs control of whether a team competes that can always be altered depending on pick protections, so the odds aren’t fair. Plus many pick protections roll forward to future years if they don’t hit. So often you don’t need the protections off to get something eventually.

So the pick is often a bird in the hand, which you wouldn’t lose, but might become an eagle in the hand?

If anyone knows of research in this area, can you point me to it? I have a valuation formula for combining two picks, but I’d love to see valuations for protected picks, and play with those numbers a little.

How much would you value a team trading you a pick for Naz Reid that only conveys if it is top 5? if not you don't get anything. That is probably how much you should value removing this protection.

FWIW, I did some half-asleep, dirty math to make an estimate. The #1 pick is obviously more valuable than the #30, so I use this old Barzilai article to come up with pick valuations.

http://www.82games.com/barzilai1.htm

If you added all the values in Table 2, this would give you a base metric of what it would be like to have all 30 picks in a draft. If you added them all (1467) and subtracted out the protected top picks, (for top 5, 440), you’ve knocked out 30% of the value of the pick.

30% feels like it makes sense for me. Maybe half the All NBA players do come out of the top five picks, but there is plenty of value in the other picks that might not be All NBA level, like an All Star, a solid starter, or just a rotation player. Having five times as many (6-30) chances to find lesser valued players who may be more likely shifts that number from 50%.

But that’s really superficial thinking. Like I said, it’s one pick in that population, and it isn’t randomly chosen 1-to-30 .. the behavior of the team affects where that pick ends up

The Detroit first and available swaps seem to be better options for getting to the value.

There’s obviously a lot of potential upside to removing top 5 protection. But with a distant pick what are the chances of that change actually yielding anything? I’m not sure that small lotto ticket has the value assigned here.

I'm not interested in this at all. An old rookie who hasn't played, and another player who doesn't play. I like Miller and would trade 2 2nds for him, but not Kessler. I don't think I'd send even that much for a late first from the 2024 draft unless they had shown something interesting already. Kessler is also too good to be limited to 18 minutes a game behind Gobert, just a huge waste of talent. There is some value in unprotectibg the pick, but I just don't see that as enough to bridge the gap here.