Official Trade Thread - Part XXIV

[dckingsfan]

This is a tough one because Cousins really doesn't play D very well (he doesn't bother a lot of shots), has an on-court attitude problem and really doesn't seem to make his teammates better on the offensive end even though he has tremendous passing ability.

Drummond is offensively challenged other than offensive rebounding, he can't shoot FTs to save his life and consistently puts himself in a position to clog up the offensive flow.

I don't think Drummond has the potential to be the offensive force Cousins could be.

I don't think Cousins has the potential to be the defensive stopper Drummond could be.

Even with their flaws, I would love to see a FC of Cousins at PF and Drummond at C... I think it would be ugly to watch

[stevemcqueen1]

Drummond wouldn't go first in a fantasy style big man draft. If you include 2008 class as young bigs, he wouldn't be among the first several picks. He can't score. His offensive repertoire consists of catching the ball at the basket and dunking it.

Davis is better than Drummond and would always go before him in any consideration. Griffin and Love would go before him. Hibbert and Lopez might if you consider them young. Cousins would go before him. Favors might. And Valanciunas might.

Cousins is already a much better player than Drummond, it's not, "one day he will be." That should be obvious.

Drummond was a 20 MPG role player off the bench last year. He's being overrated. I'd like to see him be the #1 offensive option and sole star for a team playing starter's minutes. That team would be horrendous because he's simply not capable of fulfilling that role. He does not have the offensive skill level.

Drummond is still little more than an awesome body at this point in his NBA career. I think Ruz is right, he's never going to be a volume scorer because the go to skill level is not there. The passing isn't there. The ball handling isn't there.

Awesome body aside, all of the young skilled offensive bigs would get drafted ahead of Drummond.

[stevemcqueen1]

#1 basketball truism for any level will always be "a big man that can score is worth his weight in gold."

#2 basketball truism for any level is the surest way to a championship is a transcendentally talented big.

The game has never been more perimeter oriented offensively and the few scoring bigs out there stand out like sore thumbs. All two or three of them. For a pure defense and rebounding big to approach the value of a scorer, he's got to be an absolute animal. And he's still got to bring something to the table on offense to make people guard him the whole possession like Gasol, Hibbert, and Noah each do. Otherwise you're Reggie Evans. Even the greatest pure defense and rebounding bigs ever were often journeymen like Ben Wallace and Mutumbo. Not building blocks.

[payitforward]

A couple years from now, I'm guessing you'll be saying - "By golly gosh, Cousins did turn out to be better than Drummond."

And I'm "guessing" the opposite. And so far I'm the one who is right (compare their rookie seasons).

And I'm saying that as someone who was a Drummond apologist - when he was putting up very mediocre offensive performances at UConn - and most stat guys didn't like him.

Actually, if you compare him with other 18 year old Freshman Centers, you'll find he put up outstanding numbers.

I think he'll always be a low usage offensive player, because the skill instincts aren't there - unless you consider dunking a skill. And I think Monroe's performance regressed because of Drummond's lack of skill.

He scored 15.3 points every 40 minutes. At a 60+% clip. As a 19-year old rookie. While nearly leading the league in rebounding rate. I'd like a couple of those "low-usage" guys on my team!

Btw, Monroe's regression mostly consisted of a lower 2 pt FG %, which went down from his rookie season to his second year as well (i.e. before Drummond arrived). The other factor is a drop in offensive rebounding (although his defensive rebounding actually went up). Most analysts think there's a diminishing returns effect in defensive rebounding -- but not in offensive rebounding.

I know Kev said Cousins regressed last season, but his scoring efficiency percentages improved. If he stops taking the long jumpers, they'll improve more.

In other words, if he gets better he'll be better. Note that his efg% has gone up every year he's been in the league. If it continues to improve at the same rate every year, why then in only six years he'll reach the % Drummond put up as a 19-year old rookie. That's great, don't you think?

Not trying to condemn Cousins. There's just no reason to think he'll be a great player.

[stevemcqueen1]

Leave it to PIF to miss what's obvious to anyone who actually watches basketball, and do it in the most patronizing way.

Drummond is not better than Cousins. It's a literally self evident truth if you've watched both of them.

The reason people think Cousins can be a great player is because he's ridiculously talented.

[dckingsfan]

#1 basketball truism for any level will always be "a big man that can score is worth his weight in gold."

#2 basketball truism for any level is the surest way to a championship is a transcendentally talented big.

The game has never been more perimeter oriented offensively and the few scoring bigs out there stand out like sore thumbs. All two or three of them. For a pure defense and rebounding big to approach the value of a scorer, he's got to be an absolute animal. And he's still got to bring something to the table on offense to make people guard him the whole possession like Gasol, Hibbert, and Noah each do. Otherwise you're Reggie Evans. Even the greatest pure defense and rebounding bigs ever were often journeymen like Ben Wallace and Mutumbo. Not building blocks.

No Moses Malone love? Of course one year he had a WS/48 of .248 - yikes. Drummond's .172 isn't too bad though.

[Dat2U]

Leave it to PIF to miss what's obvious to anyone who actually watches basketball, and do it in the most patronizing way.

Drummond is not better than Cousins. It's a literally self evident truth if you've watched both of them.

The reason people think Cousins can be a great player is because he's ridiculously talented.

The eyes lie.

Cousins is a more skilled offensive player but that doesn't make him more talented or even better. In fact, it's partly because of that skill, that Cousins reduces his value to his own team through the inefficient shots he chooses to take. Andre Drummond is 3+ years younger, yet has a better understanding of his limitations and displays keener awareness in terms of what his role should be offensively.

Defensively, its not even close. Drummond has elite physical tools, can lock down any big in an ISO scenario and has the quick feet to cover ground and close down driving lanes. Cousins, while blessed with talent to be a good defender, does none of this and always appears to be a step slow in his defensive rotations (probably because he's never in ideal condition). Cousins seemingly has no grasp on doing the little things it takes to win games. He's mastered the ability to put up huge numbers, but his attitude & style of play cannibalizes team chemistry. I have a hard time believing that giving Cousins a max contract for a job not so well done is going to motivate or help him mature into a guy that can maximize his potential and turn a franchise into a contender.

[nate33]

I'm not going to comment on the Drummond versus Cousins debate because it's a false choice. We have no shot at acquiring Drummond.

I want to focus on whether Cousins is worth it. What is the likelihood that he will improve? For giggles, I ran a screen of young, low-efficiency big man chuckers to see how they turned out. Specifically, I screened for players 23 or younger, 6-10 or taller, who averaged at least 15 FGA's per 36 minutes (1500 total minutes minimum) with a TS% less than .540. Here are the names that came up:

Al Jefferson
Jermaine O'Neal
Lamarcus Aldridge
Derrick Coleman
Kevin Garnett
Keith Van Horn
Demarcus Cousins
Joe Smith
Amare Stoudemire
Andray Blatche
Patrick Ewing
Charlie Villaneuva
Clifford Robinson

That 12 players excluding Cousins. Of those 12, there are:
2 HOFers (Ewing and Garnett)
5 All Stars (O'Neal, Aldridge, Coleman, Stoudemire, Robinson)
2 Underwhelming but capable starters (Jefferson, Smith)
1 Enigma (Blatche)
2 Bench players (Van Horn, Villanueva)

I think it's fair to say that Van Horn's and Villanueva's poor careers were fairly predictable early on because of their obvious inability to defend. I'm pretty confident in saying Cousins isn't on that path. If you throw those two guys out, I like those odds. Out of 10 players, 2 HOFers, 5 Allstars, 2 underwhelming starters and 1 enigma.

[Ruzious]

Re nate's criteria, both Brook Lopez and Greg Monroe fell below that 54% TS% in their 3rd years - though Monroe might not quite have had 15 FGA's per 36 minutes.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

I'm not going to comment on the Drummond versus Cousins debate because it's a false choice. We have no shot at acquiring Drummond.

I want to focus on whether Cousins is worth it. What is the likelihood that he will improve? For giggles, I ran a screen of young, low-efficiency big man chuckers to see how they turned out. Specifically, I screened for players 23 or younger, 6-10 or taller, who averaged at least 15 FGA's per 36 minutes (1500 total minutes minimum) with a TS% less than .540. Here are the names that came up:

Al Jefferson
Jermaine O'Neal
Lamarcus Aldridge
Derrick Coleman
Kevin Garnett
Keith Van Horn
Demarcus Cousins
Joe Smith
Amare Stoudemire
Andray Blatche
Patrick Ewing
Charlie Villaneuva
Clifford Robinson

That 12 players excluding Cousins. Of those 12, there are:
2 HOFers (Ewing and Garnett)
5 All Stars (O'Neal, Aldridge, Coleman, Stoudemire, Robinson)
2 Underwhelming but capable starters (Jefferson, Smith)
1 Enigma (Blatche)
2 Bench players (Van Horn, Villanueva)

I think it's fair to say that Van Horn's and Villanueva's poor careers were fairly predictable early on because of their obvious inability to defend. I'm pretty confident in saying Cousins isn't on that path. If you throw those two guys out, I like those odds. Out of 10 players, 2 HOFers, 5 Allstars, 2 underwhelming starters and 1 enigma.

Well the debate really should be Cousins vs Monroe. Both are talented young centers who could legitimately be obtainable and could be RFAs next offseason. Skill wise they are very comparable, and have connections here with Monroe being from Georgetown, and Cousins being Wall's bud and former teammate.

Of the two I'd take Monroe. But really I see these two as the Wizards top targets between now and next offseason, and could be seen as plans 1A and 1B. IMO adding either of them to the current core of Wall, Beal, Porter, would push the Wizards into the upper echelon of teams in the league, on par with teams like Ok City and Houston.

[deneem4]

Dummond plays nxt to monroe....another good young big man...but by himself is another thing...put monroe next to cousins....drummond is good but cousins put up #s downlow without another force as good as him remember that

[Ruzious]

I'd suggest to the folks (or folk) who base their opinons 99.99% on stats, let's wait and see what Drummond does this year playing starters' minutes and see if he actually helps his team win - which wasn't the the case at UConn (which got dramatically worse when he was there - despite having excellent talent), and Detroit fell flat last season. At UConn, he and Alex Oriakhi were quality bigs, but it shows that when you have 2 offensively limited bigs playing together, you got a problem. They also had Lamb - a lotto pick and - and 2 other talented guards who likely will get drafted.

[Dat2U]

Right now I don't think either Monroe or Cousins is the ideal fit. Unless their going to be paired with a stud defender at PF, we'd have have some problems defending at the rim which is typically a fatal flaw for teams with aspirations of being a contender. Neither is much of a defender and while I'd certainly take either on my team, when considering the likely cost of each (max or close to max extension plus significant assets), I'm not sure either is really a good investment.

IMO, I'd lean towards the defenders as the ideal targets going forward.

Tyson Chandler - 30 yrs old - .207 WS48
- A little old, but If the NY situation gets untenable this year (and it might), they could possibly look to break things up.

Serge Ibaka - 23 yrs old - .181 WS48
- Probably unrealistic. Unless OKC slips a bit as a contender and decides it needs to replenish it's roster by cashing in a major chip.

Chris Bosh - 28 yrs old - .175 WS48
- Most overqualified 3rd option in the game. Will be a potential FA after this season. Will only be an option if Wade/LeBron decide to leave.

Al Horford - 26 yrs old - .153 WS48
- Rock solid C that's a bit undersized but one of the smartest players in league. If things go south for Atlanta, he may become a more realistic option.

Joakim Noah - 27 yrs old - .147 WS48
- A warrior who steps up in the biggest games but who has also taken a physical beating. He's still productive if a bit injury prone at this stage. Chicago likely doesn't deal him unless something seriously goes wrong this season.

Roy Hibbert - 26 yrs old - .129 WS48
- Showed how valuable he was in the playoffs when Miami had no answer for him. Bulked up significantly this offseason, not sure how that will effective his game. Another guy that won't likely get dealt unless something goes wrong.

Omer Asik - 26 yrs old - .108 WS48
- Not quite on the level of the others b/c of his limitations offensively. Most likely trade option but would likely need to work a 3-way with Houston and another team to make it happen.

Other ideal fits who probably aren't available:
Jonas Valanciunas
Derrick Favors

[nate33]

I like all the players on that list, but so do the teams that already have them. Chandler is too old and broken down, so he doesn't thrill me. Ibaka, Noah, Hibbert, Valanciunas and Favors are absolutely unavailable. There is zero chance that we can acquire them. That leaves only Horford, Bosh and Asik.

Horford: He is extremely unlikely to be available. It would require a major change in circumstances in Atlanta. It's remotely possible that he gets shopped, but I wouldn't plan on it. Sure, if that change in circumstances happens before the Trade Deadline this year, then yes, Horford should be in the mix. But if doesn't, you can pretty much consider him on the completely unavailable list.

Bosh: He is potentially a free agent this summer. If Lebron opts out and Miami blows it up, then I'd be fine going after Bosh. But if that doesn't happen, then he is off the list. One problem: Bosh will probably cost a Supermax contract and we don't have that kind of cap room. I also wonder if it's wise to pay Bosh $19M a year when we can pay Cousins $15M.

Asik: At the same price, I'd take Cousins over Asik. But I'd take Asik on his current contract over Cousins at the max. Asik should be in the mix. But since he isn't a free agent, I suspect we would have to give up something fairly valuable to get him - Porter or a 1st plus incentives.

[payitforward]

Leave it to PIF to miss what's obvious to anyone who actually watches basketball, and do it in the most patronizing way.

Drummond is not better than Cousins. It's a literally self evident truth if you've watched both of them.

The reason people think Cousins can be a great player is because he's ridiculously talented.

Don't be a jerk, stevemcqueen1. I watch as much basketball as you I'm sure -- and I've been watching it a lot longer than you (of that I'm very very sure! ).

No one doubts Cousins' talent -- I've seen a lot of him (as much as one conveniently can living on the East Coast), and he's got huge gifts. And no one questions whether he "can be a great player." But "can be" doesn't equal "is" or even "will be." That remains to be seen.

I would have picked him in front of Wall in 2010, with the slight worry that his attitude issues might stick with him and hold him back. They have. And even more, he's started to think he can do anything -- or rather, he's started to do lower % things over higher % things. In particular, right from the start of his NBA career he showed that he wanted to take 5-10 foot jumpers instead of doing what he did at Kentucky, which is operate almost exclusively inside. With the predictable result that he's a lot less effective in the pros than he was in college.

In the case of Drummond, he's been waaay better in the league than he was in college. And if you don't think this guy is "ridiculously talented"... well, I don't know how you could miss it; leave it at that. Watch him.

Start w/ the physical specimen Drummond is, and his level of coordination and speed. It seems obvious that he has a huge upside. I.e. that he "can be a great player." In fact, so far he has been one! Now, he's only logged 1000+ minutes, so no conclusions can be drawn.

But so far so good -- and that's a separator between him and Cousins about whom one can say "so far so maybe."

[payitforward]

Asik: ...isn't a free agent, I suspect we would have to give up something fairly valuable to get him - Porter or a 1st plus incentives.

No question we'd have to give something up -- i.e. acquire him via a trade. But surely Houston will be willing to deal him, no?

Heck, they need to deal him! I can't imagine they want to pay him $15m+ next year -- not given they owe $51m+ to Howard, Harden & Lin. That'd put them at $66m for 4 players! And a trade next year would require taking back @ that much in salary, so they'd likely still be behind the 8-ball.

He makes $5.25m this year; I keep thinking they'll want to trade him for salaries they can shed, not guys they can build with. We have quite a number of shed-able salaries. Might make us a good trade partner. But... is this an "Ernie" style deal?

[doclinkin]

I'm not going to comment on the Drummond versus Cousins debate because it's a false choice. We have no shot at acquiring Drummond.

I want to focus on whether Cousins is worth it. What is the likelihood that he will improve? For giggles, I ran a screen of young, low-efficiency big man chuckers to see how they turned out. Specifically, I screened for players 23 or younger, 6-10 or taller, who averaged at least 15 FGA's per 36 minutes (1500 total minutes minimum) with a TS% less than .540. Here are the names that came up:

Al Jefferson
Jermaine O'Neal
Lamarcus Aldridge
Derrick Coleman
Kevin Garnett
Keith Van Horn
Demarcus Cousins
Joe Smith
Amare Stoudemire
Andray Blatche
Patrick Ewing
Charlie Villaneuva
Clifford Robinson

That 12 players excluding Cousins. Of those 12, there are:
2 HOFers (Ewing and Garnett)
5 All Stars (O'Neal, Aldridge, Coleman, Stoudemire, Robinson)
2 Underwhelming but capable starters (Jefferson, Smith)
1 Enigma (Blatche)
2 Bench players (Van Horn, Villanueva)

I think it's fair to say that Van Horn's and Villanueva's poor careers were fairly predictable early on because of their obvious inability to defend. I'm pretty confident in saying Cousins isn't on that path. If you throw those two guys out, I like those odds. Out of 10 players, 2 HOFers, 5 Allstars, 2 underwhelming starters and 1 enigma.

And what, um, one (1) championship ring?

[Ruzious]

No one doubts Cousins' talent -- I've seen a lot of him (as much as one conveniently can living on the East Coast), and he's got huge gifts. And no one questions whether he "can be a great player." But "can be" doesn't equal "is" or even "will be." That remains to be seen.

I would have picked him in front of Wall in 2010, with the slight worry that his attitude issues might stick with him and hold him back. They have. And even more, he's started to think he can do anything -- or rather, he's started to do lower % things over higher % things. In particular, right from the start of his NBA career he showed that he wanted to take 5-10 foot jumpers instead of doing what he did at Kentucky, which is operate almost exclusively inside. With the predictable result that he's a lot less effective in the pros than he was in college.

In the case of Drummond, he's been waaay better in the league than he was in college. And if you don't think this guy is "ridiculously talented"... well, I don't know how you could miss it; leave it at that. Watch him.

Start w/ the physical specimen Drummond is, and his level of coordination and speed. It seems obvious that he has a huge upside. I.e. that he "can be a great player." In fact, so far he has been one! Now, he's only logged 1000+ minutes, so no conclusions can be drawn. But so far so good -- and that's a separator between him and Cousins about whom one can say "so far so maybe."

Holy backtrack, Batman!

[deneem4]

Cousins can dominate the paint by his self, on offense and defense(zone) we can actually start seraphin at pf nxt to cousins...wall will ddefinitely keep cousins in the paint because he knows as long as wall drives big men will have to step up...which leaves cousins open for looks..

sac dont kno how to utilize their players...they had a big ass star pg who couldve been an allstar his 2nd season if they didn't kove him to sf...instead of letting cousins be in the paint they run top key plays for him...

[stevemcqueen1]

No Moses Malone love? Of course one year he had a WS/48 of .248 - yikes. Drummond's .172 isn't too bad though.

Moses was great. I don't think he qualifies as a pure defense and rebounding big like Mutumbo or Wallace though. He scored 29,000 points in his career and averaged over 20 PPG throughout his prime. Hit 30 PPG one year. He could score and that's what his MVPs came from. Plus I'm not sure he was a great rebounder.

Ironically, Moses was still a journeyman. By his own choosing I'd say. I think that era was wonkey and even great players might have to change teams to get the most money.

Drummond's WS/48 is great. Many of his per minute numbers are great. But he put up those rates playing a very very limited role. 20 MPG, only 60 games and 10 starts, very low usage, basically a fifth option on offense. Someone who is there to protect the rim and body up bigs in the paint and grab rebounds & get his scoring catching entry passes and offensive rebounds leading to dunks. Put him in a role where he's playing 30+ MPG and operating as the first option on offense and the bottom would fall out on his efficiency. He's not capable of playing the role other young star bigs are at this point in his career because he lacks the skill level.

Will he develop a high skill level eventually? Maybe, but I'm very skeptical. Maybe a little of a face up game one day. He should at least be able to develop a few post moves hinging on his quickness to score with. He's a dreadful jump shooter and I don't ever see that being a part of his repertoire. And I don't think the natural scoring instincts and mentality to get the ball and put it in the hoop are there. The aggressiveness.