Official Trade Thread XIV: 6/14/10 - 12/22/10

[fishercob]

Please. The Gilbert we saw after the first 15 games of rust-shaking last year was a mirage? Nate's always going on about he averaged 25 and 7 or something like that. Gil may not be an all-NBA player but he's still damned good -- a borderline all-star.

All of the guys mentioned above were at least one-time all-stars before being dealt for essentially nothing. And the teams that traded them were no better off.

[Wizardspride]

I misspoke. In and of itself, an expiring is not more important than raw cap space. However, history tells us stars get traded for expirings MUCH more often than they do for cap room. The cap-clearing frenzy this year has skewed some perceptions on how talent is acquired. Usually there afre only a few teams with cap room to take on a star, and often those teams dont have the valuable "filler" to make the deals work.

Just look at the examples above and dozens others like it. Most trades are made within the 125% rule. Being vastly under the cap -- at the expense of all-star talent -- usually accomplishes nothing.

Key words being at the expense of all-star talent. Gil is no longer considered all-star talent outside of this forum, imo. And he's not considered a player you build around to win a championship.

Heck, they're people outside this forum who NEVER thought Gil was an all-star talent to begin with.

[Kanyewest]

The Gilbert we saw after the first 15 games of rust-shaking last year was a mirage? Nate's always going on about he averaged 25 and 7 or something like that.

In the month of December, Gilbert averaged 25.2 ppg, 7.6 apg, and 5 rpg. His TS% in that month was at 56.5%. Of course Gilbert still was ONLY getting to the 6.5 times per game, as opposed 10 times a game during the 05-06 and 06-07 season. His turnovers were also high at 3.8 per game but I expect would have gone down in time as the season progressed.

[fishercob]

The Gilbert we saw after the first 15 games of rust-shaking last year was a mirage? Nate's always going on about he averaged 25 and 7 or something like that.

In the month of December, Gilbert averaged 25.2 ppg, 7.6 apg, and 5 rpg. His TS% in that month was at 56.5%. Of course Gilbert still was ONLY getting to the 6.5 times per game, as opposed 10 times a game during the 05-06 and 06-07 season. His turnovers were also high at 3.8 per game but I expect would have gone down in time after the season progressed.

Well I can't see how we could possibly have use for a player like that.

[Hoopalotta]

Exactly. The Pistons had the foresight to trade Chauncey's bloated deal for AI's expiring. They endured some pain in the short term, but parlayed the cap space into building blocks for a perennial champion. And Billups fell apart as soon as he left town. Case closed!

I actually think in the case of this example as applied to us, we would be better off with even a Ben Gordon type signing in 2012 or 2013 than we would with Gil come 2013-2014. The reason that signing told sour for Detroit was more in the context of them not having top roster talent for Gordon to compliment, so he's an isolated piece within a poorly conceived framework. Charlie V was a bad idea on any account, but there's plenty of teams in the league that would benefit from Gordon on that contract so long as we understand he got hurt last year.

That's pretty hypothetical, as I have no idea who the 2012 Ben Gordon equivalent would be, but adding a highly efficient 24-26 year old 2nd/3rd option somewhere on the wing about two years from now would promise of more upward momentum than riding out Gil's deal. I understand that not everyone is suggesting we ride out Gil's deal, but it's worth noting and I'd consider that type signing to be on the lower end of what we'd be hoping for opportunity-wise.

In the context of the greater debate, assuming we were going to get a Gordon 'equivalent', the information that would push the argument further in either a positive or negative direction would be the question of what sorts of advantages would have been accrued in the interim with potentially higher draft seeding and cap space. My view is that we would have leveraged that into some sorts of advantages, though I'd expect smaller 'Maynor' advantages rather than 'Westbrook' type advantages.

For me, that's still enough to pull the trigger as I see the momentum building at the right time to coincide with our young talent, even if it's less overwhelming of an incentive than one might hope when plotting a deconstruction.

[Ruzious]

This is deja vu all over again. Guys, I can only go through the same set of discussions so many times. I'm bowing out. It's gotten past the point that anyone's going to change their minds.

[Hoopalotta]

This is deja vu all over again. Guys, I can only go through the same set of discussions so many times. I'm bowing out. It's gotten past the point that anyone's going to change their minds.

That's one of the big reasons I wasn't trying to get in on this one. I think I'd already hit on just every facet of that which resonates for me on this long before the "Gil-Carter" thread ever came up. It's basically become a faith thing.

[nate33]

I misspoke. In and of itself, an expiring is not more important than raw cap space. However, history tells us stars get traded for expirings MUCH more often than they do for cap room. The cap-clearing frenzy this year has skewed some perceptions on how talent is acquired. Usually there afre only a few teams with cap room to take on a star, and often those teams dont have the valuable "filler" to make the deals work.

That's because it's much more common to find a suitor with an expiring contract than it is to find a suitor who is $15M below the salary cap. Expiring contracts are more common than cap space, not better.

[nate33]

The Gilbert we saw after the first 15 games of rust-shaking last year was a mirage? Nate's always going on about he averaged 25 and 7 or something like that.

In the month of December, Gilbert averaged 25.2 ppg, 7.6 apg, and 5 rpg. His TS% in that month was at 56.5%. Of course Gilbert still was ONLY getting to the 6.5 times per game, as opposed 10 times a game during the 05-06 and 06-07 season. His turnovers were also high at 3.8 per game but I expect would have gone down in time as the season progressed.

His TS% was .531 which is a notable difference. .531 is slightly below the league average. .565 would be slightly above the league average. I'm not trying to make a huge argument about this, I just want to make sure the facts are straight.

[verbal8]

I misspoke. In and of itself, an expiring is not more important than raw cap space. However, history tells us stars get traded for expirings MUCH more often than they do for cap room. The cap-clearing frenzy this year has skewed some perceptions on how talent is acquired. Usually there afre only a few teams with cap room to take on a star, and often those teams dont have the valuable "filler" to make the deals work.

That's because it's much more common to find a suitor with an expiring contract than it is to find a suitor who is $15M below the salary cap. Expiring contracts are more common than cap space, not better.

One thing about cap space is if you carry it into the season it loses value. If you have 10 million in cap space at the start of the season, it is only worth $5 million at the halfway point. If instead you have a $10 million expiring contract, you have the value of the player for 1/2 a year and the ability to take on 1.25 million more(the prorated difference of 12.5 million in contracts). If you the team throws in 3 million in cash, the difference between cap space an the expiring is very small.

[Ruzious]

I misspoke. In and of itself, an expiring is not more important than raw cap space. However, history tells us stars get traded for expirings MUCH more often than they do for cap room. The cap-clearing frenzy this year has skewed some perceptions on how talent is acquired. Usually there afre only a few teams with cap room to take on a star, and often those teams dont have the valuable "filler" to make the deals work.

That's because it's much more common to find a suitor with an expiring contract than it is to find a suitor who is $15M below the salary cap. Expiring contracts are more common than cap space, not better.

One thing about cap space is if you carry it into the season it loses value. If you have 10 million in cap space at the start of the season, it is only worth $5 million at the halfway point. If instead you have a $10 million expiring contract, you have the value of the player for 1/2 a year and the ability to take on 1.25 million more(the prorated difference of 12.5 million in contracts). If you the team throws in 3 million in cash, the difference between cap space an the expiring is very small.

Otoh, it doesn't lose its value for a team that wants to dump a salary at the trade deadline to avoid the lux tax, because the measurement for hitting the lux tax cap is measured by your team salaries at the end of the season. So, if you dump a salary at midseason to a team with cap space, it's as if you never had that player on your team during the season - for lux tax purposes - making a mid-season BOYD deal a decent possibility - in years that there are teams still trying to avoid the lux tax.

[AceDegenerate]

The Gilbert we saw after the first 15 games of rust-shaking last year was a mirage? Nate's always going on about he averaged 25 and 7 or something like that.

In the month of December, Gilbert averaged 25.2 ppg, 7.6 apg, and 5 rpg. His TS% in that month was at 56.5%. Of course Gilbert still was ONLY getting to the 6.5 times per game, as opposed 10 times a game during the 05-06 and 06-07 season. His turnovers were also high at 3.8 per game but I expect would have gone down in time as the season progressed.

His TS% was .531 which is a notable difference. .531 is slightly below the league average. .565 would be slightly above the league average. I'm not trying to make a huge argument about this, I just want to make sure the facts are straight.

Let's also make sure to point out, that last season Gilbert shot worse than he ever has as a Wizard coming off his injury. It's very reasonable to assume that was rust on his shot from not playing in 2-3 Years. There is every reason to believe he will be back to form this year.

[nate33]

Let's also make sure to point out, that last season Gilbert shot worse than he ever has as a Wizard coming off his injury. It's very reasonable to assume that was rust on his shot from not playing in 2-3 Years. There is every reason to believe he will be back to form this year.

I agree. I figure Arenas' assists will drop off but his TS% will increase a bit. I think he'll be a real good offensive player for us who will average something like 22 points with a TS% around 57%. I just don't think we should be paying $20M a year for that kind of production when it comes with poor defense.

Kevin Martin posts numbers like that, but with a 60% TS% and he is only paid $11M a year.

[Kanyewest]

I actually think in the case of this example as applied to us, we would be better off with even a Ben Gordon type signing in 2012 or 2013 than we would with Gil come 2013-2014. The reason that signing told sour for Detroit was more in the context of them not having top roster talent for Gordon to compliment, so he's an isolated piece within a poorly conceived framework. Charlie V was a bad idea on any account, but there's plenty of teams in the league that would benefit from Gordon on that contract so long as we understand he got hurt last year.

So you think that Chicago should have resigned him? Maybe. I was reading somewhere that the Bulls would have had enough cap room to give Boozer the max, keep Gordon at his current contract, and keep Hinrich. Of course, they would have to give up their first round pick.

That's pretty hypothetical, as I have no idea who the 2012 Ben Gordon equivalent would be, but adding a highly efficient 24-26 year old 2nd/3rd option somewhere on the wing about two years from now would promise of more upward momentum than riding out Gil's deal. I understand that not everyone is suggesting we ride out Gil's deal, but it's worth noting and I'd consider that type signing to be on the lower end of what we'd be hoping for opportunity-wise.

In the context of the greater debate, assuming we were going to get a Gordon 'equivalent', the information that would push the argument further in either a positive or negative direction would be the question of what sorts of advantages would have been accrued in the interim with potentially higher draft seeding and cap space. My view is that we would have leveraged that into some sorts of advantages, though I'd expect smaller 'Maynor' advantages rather than 'Westbrook' type advantages.

For me, that's still enough to pull the trigger as I see the momentum building at the right time to coincide with our young talent, even if it's less overwhelming of an incentive than one might hope when plotting a deconstruction.

The Wizards opportunity to tank and get picks will probably only be a year. By tank I mean get a top 5 pick. Otherwise, I could see John Wall helping the Wizards get enough wins to avoid a significant chance to get a top 3 pick. Guys like CP3 and Deron Williams helped their teams pick in the late lottery in their rookie seasons. There's a good chance that the Wizards could get 27-30 wins without Arenas. Of course, down the line if you want the Wizards to tank even more, the Wizards would have to trade a veteran like Hinrich. In another year, the Wizards may even have to trade Blatche to keep playing the ping pong ball machine.

Four years down the line, Arenas's expiring contract could net the Wizards a Ben Gordon caliber player who is overpaid. Of course, the Wizards would still have to acquire a Westbrook like talent. With EG willing to take on more salary and build through youth, you have to hope that the Wizards will find someone in the
draft in a 3-4 year span. Even someone like Westbrook wasn't a lock to be a very good player when he was selected at #5.

[Kanyewest]

The Gilbert we saw after the first 15 games of rust-shaking last year was a mirage? Nate's always going on about he averaged 25 and 7 or something like that.

In the month of December, Gilbert averaged 25.2 ppg, 7.6 apg, and 5 rpg. His TS% in that month was at 56.5%. Of course Gilbert still was ONLY getting to the 6.5 times per game, as opposed 10 times a game during the 05-06 and 06-07 season. His turnovers were also high at 3.8 per game but I expect would have gone down in time as the season progressed.

His TS% was .531 which is a notable difference. .531 is slightly below the league average. .565 would be slightly above the league average. I'm not trying to make a huge argument about this, I just want to make sure the facts are straight.

Yup, I double checked my math and forgot to multiply the free throw attempts in the denominator. But that was certainly better than he started the season. I personally think Arenas would have improved as the season progressed but there is no way of knowing that.

[sfam]

Please. The Gilbert we saw after the first 15 games of rust-shaking last year was a mirage? Nate's always going on about he averaged 25 and 7 or something like that. Gil may not be an all-NBA player but he's still damned good -- a borderline all-star.

All of the guys mentioned above were at least one-time all-stars before being dealt for essentially nothing. And the teams that traded them were no better off.

This is a great point to keep in mind. Nobody wants to be the next New Jersey Nets. Trading Arenas for expiring does not automatically equal a championship down the road - in fact the chances are lots better that we'll feel bad about that trade in the future.

Now again, I'm not saying we never think of trading him, but to do so prior to seeing how Gil and Wall interact would be an extreme risk-averse move.

[Hoopalotta]

So you think that Chicago should have resigned [Ben Gordon]? Maybe. I was reading somewhere that the Bulls would have had enough cap room to give Boozer the max, keep Gordon at his current contract, and keep Hinrich. Of course, they would have to give up their first round pick.

I don't think it's really fair to criticize Chicago for what they did as they took a swing at a game changer signing. In hindsight, with it appearing that they didn't have a shot at those game changers, I'd prefer Gordon, but that's not a fair criticism.

I was really talking more about Gordon as a signing in the greater context of it being either good or bad (for example, if Orlando could have somehow worked a sign and trade last year to get Gordon for a Turkogolue TPE, I would have considered that a pretty damn sweet move - at least if we ignore that fact that he was injured).

The Wizards opportunity to tank and get picks will probably only be a year. By tank I mean get a top 5 pick. Otherwise, I could see John Wall helping the Wizards get enough wins to avoid a significant chance to get a top 3 pick. Guys like CP3 and Deron Williams helped their teams pick in the late lottery in their rookie seasons. There's a good chance that the Wizards could get 27-30 wins without Arenas. Of course, down the line if you want the Wizards to tank even more, the Wizards would have to trade a veteran like Hinrich. In another year, the Wizards may even have to trade Blatche to keep playing the ping pong ball machine.

Four years down the line, Arenas's expiring contract could net the Wizards a Ben Gordon caliber player who is overpaid. Of course, the Wizards would still have to acquire a Westbrook like talent. With EG willing to take on more salary and build through youth, you have to hope that the Wizards will find someone in the
draft in a 3-4 year span. Even someone like Westbrook wasn't a lock to be a very good player when he was selected at #5.

I can see all that except that I don't think Arenas' expiring deal would net us anything close to a young second option scorer fresh off his rookie deal (and keep in mind, this is at the lower end of what we'd be willing to settle for at the last opportunity and after we'd have spent a few years leveraging the naked cap into other assets). I fully concede that we might not be looking at a particularly high pick and it's probably just this one year.

But all told, I'm saying the various scenarios of what could and would be done with the void in both talent and cap usage with Gilbert heading out for an expiring now has me of the belief that our trajectory upward in years 3, 4 and 5 would be sharper without him. I'm not going to make blanket statements like "we should tank in 2012" without seeing the lay of the land - all kinds of things could change before now and then and it just depends on the opportunities.

My view is Gil is the right sort of player at the wrong time, with his peak years coming before our window of doing anything substantial is open, thus detracting from our ability to accrue young assets that mesh with the core - guys that will be here when we need them.

This of course comes from the perspective that we're not likely to be more than a 30-35 win even with Gil, so I'd just as soon get a higher pick this year even if it's just marginal and be sitting on a hill of cap right after the lockout to exploit any potential imbalances after the new CBA. I also like putting the younger players in larger roles and feel the scoring void can easily be filled, even if giving up efficiency. While I think we'll win more with Gil, I'm not sure that really teaches our developmental guys how to win. I'm not really sure J.J. Hickson knows how to win after being on 60 win teams.

No small consideration is also that I'd like to completely avoid the possibility of Gil getting hurt as, if he does, we might not be able to trade him till he's an expiring. I don't see the potential of maybe getting the 8th seed as being worth that. And, it's my belief as well that he's not going to recoup his value to the point where we'd get tangible difference making assets for him anyway. Maybe a late round pick if there were more than one bidder, but those are generally for sale for $3 million.

For all of those reasons, I like the scenario three years out without Gil a lot better than with Gil.

[AceDegenerate]

Man. All of you bums better be ready to eat some serious Crow this season. If Ted keeps his word and Arenas plays for this team this year and does well, I don't wanna see any about-faces. I don't even think you all should have a rooting interest in this team if Gil plays, just root for him to get injured again so you can all be right.

When Arenas plays this year, and has this team on pace to be in the Playoffs, you will never see the end of me. You thought CCJ was bad with I told you so, you just wait.

You all better say your prayers that Ted is some kind of BS artist in the media and that they really are trying to trade Arenas, cause a lot of self-proclaimed Basketball "Wizards" on this site are in for the rude awakening of their life. I will be here front and center to put it right in your faces.

[gesa2]

Krizko, I'm in the keep Gil camp with you, but the idea that the people who disagree with us don't have a right to root for the team is over the top. Until we at least get to the second round of the playoffs, the traders would just argue that we're getting worse draft picks and flattening out our peak. It'll take 3-4 years to really resolve this, and even then there'll probably be so many other factors at play that "proof" will be elusive.

[Kanyewest]

Exactly. The Pistons had the foresight to trade Chauncey's bloated deal for AI's expiring. They endured some pain in the short term, but parlayed the cap space into building blocks for a perennial champion. And Billups fell apart as soon as he left town. Case closed!

Speaking of the Detroit Pistons, some would say they picked the wrong time to blow it up. The Celtics, who beat the Pistons in the 2008 ECF, lost Kevin Garnett. The Pistons had swept the Magic the previous postseason and were inside Orlando's head. But there was no way that the Pistons were going to beat the Lakers in the finals so they obviously made the right decision