Why are our valuations so off?

[zimpy27]

In the last six months we've seen a ton of deals we'd laugh at on the board. Of course, there are always outliers. But the deals we've seen recently seem SO FAR off from what we'd accept here as a fair deal, there has to be some explanation to the gap.

Luka deal
Holiday for Simons (and Port throws in 2nds-which I know were rescinded)
The ATL-NO deal (NO ONE on this Board would go for this)
Powell to Miami for almost nothing
Bane dealt for so much draft capital
Sexton for Nurkic, plus Utah adds a 2nd
Poole for CJ

Of course, GM's are must more aware of what's going on, and have a ton more info than we do. You could explain some of these, but where are we off? Or, are many GM's just idiots?

We project value objectively but value in trades is impacted by subjective needs or direction of the team.

I would say that the team we perceive to have got the worst end of the value was probably the team driving for the trade to be done.

[OGSactownballer]

The FAs this season are taking a beating on their contracts compared to past seasons. More players than normal will only be offered a vet min contract or some exception level.

I agree with everything you said. I will add that this FA crop is complete garbage.... so that is further depressing the money being handed out.

The trend of extending the quality guys early has put a huge dampener on real free agency. Most teams are taking advantage of the ability to cost control their own draftees earlier and never let them hit the open market. Same with giving the true talents the max extension before they even have a chance to be wooed by the big markets.
Mits actually a very astute thing to do.

[Vae Victus]

Next year’s FA will be very interesting. Due to so much player movement, lack of bird rights, and shallow FA class, we’re gonna see a gargantuan clash of the old way of spending to the new 2nd Apron age.

There’s gonna be a bunch of FA cap space available and few worthwhile players to spend it on, but are teams gonna be throwing bags around willy nilly to above avg players like Austin Reaves, Deandre Ayton, Norm Powell, Kessler, Collins, etc. Or will we see GMs be hyper disciplined in not saddling themselves with poor deals but only offering NTMLE+ sized deals (15-20m) and reserving the big deals (30+ mil) for true #1/2 options and #3 options who can defend capably.

[Texas Chuck]

I'm off a lot because I'm not particularly smart. Or I have my pet cats I overvalue. Or guys I've slotted and haven't adjusted on. Plus other biases I am both aware and unaware of.

We are off as a group mostly because we are looking at value mostly in a vacuum when deals happen outside of that. The it only takes one team factor is real.

We are also slow to correct to new market valuations.

And of course everything here is swayed by the fact that 75% of our active posters only post regarding their favorite team and its the exception who doesn't set values too high on their players. And conversely many posters devalue players suggested should go to their team to justify higher asks.

Those posters who are posting about every team (godaddy, babyjax, reggiesknicks, jayjaysee, mavrelous, etc tend to do pretty well overall on value).

[OGSactownballer]

Think honestly CBA killed free agency. Sign and trade is so limiting now. Players have way less options driving down their value. Getting rid of the 125 percent rule makes it so much harder to dump money.

Think we seeing similar value driven down in trades. Players have less options on the open market. Not as many teams could make a trade for stars now like they could on old CBA .


Players use to be picking from 6 to 10 teams in free agency or trade market. Now you lucky if 2 or 3 teams can afford you.

Actually the CBA did exactly what it was designed to do - level the playing field.

The actual fans that are ticked off about this are Lakers/Boston et al who can no longer simply out spend the smaller markets to steal players and treat the small markets as farm teams.

And look at this past finals - two small market teams. Definitely a successful result.

[165bows]

I think I was most off on Sexton I really thought he’d have decent value.

[SkyHook]

I think I was most off on Sexton I really thought he’d have decent value.

I was as well here, but it makes (some) sense in retrospect.

[Texas Chuck]

Think honestly CBA killed free agency. Sign and trade is so limiting now. Players have way less options driving down their value. Getting rid of the 125 percent rule makes it so much harder to dump money.

Think we seeing similar value driven down in trades. Players have less options on the open market. Not as many teams could make a trade for stars now like they could on old CBA .


Players use to be picking from 6 to 10 teams in free agency or trade market. Now you lucky if 2 or 3 teams can afford you.

Actually the CBA did exactly what it was designed to do - level the playing field.

The actual fans that are ticked off about this are Lakers/Boston et al who can no longer simply out spend the smaller markets to steal players and treat the small markets as farm teams.

And look at this past finals - two small market teams. Definitely a successful result.

Lakers haven't been outspending teams. And in fact spending has not a ton to do with market and more about the specific governor, right? Clippers started spending with Ballmer, but didn't before. Chicago hates paying tax. Houston doesn't pay a lot of tax. OKC has been a big taxpayer before and almost certainly will be again. Minnesota has a very high payroll, etc...

I don't think its really a market thing. Yes big markets have real financial advantages, but its not like baseball where that tends to dictate the haves from the have nots pretty exclusively.

With the right governor, the Kings could be a big spender too, just the Maloofs went broke and the new guy isn't willing to spend huge either.

[ReggiesKnicks]

RE Simons/Jrue/Sexton/Monk:

I wasn't far off in Simons being undervalued.

Deal #1:
#16 is steep for Simons.
Simons for Isaac/#25 is much closer.

Simons for KCP + DEN 1st

I was off in Sexton.

I think this is why we haven't seen Monk or Coby traded. They may be better than Simons/Sexton, and in Monk's case, a longer contract than the others.

I was coming around to Jrue being at least neutral prior to him being traded. I think a playable player on an expiring deal is the definition of neutral. I was close here.

RE New Orleans/Atlanta:

Joe Dumars has entered the chat.

Ultimately, if you have a player Top 3-5 on your board, you would trade an unprotected 1st to move up to get them in the teens. I don't think they needed to pay that price, and that's the misstep.

The other misstep is all the other teams that didn't make the trade.

I'm not sure who is worse. Dumars for offering it, or Toronto/Phoenix/Chicago for not taking it.

Ultimately, all these teams are, to me, in the running for most disappointing franchises of the past 5 years. Meanwhile, a team like Atlanta somehow flipped Murray after his disappointing tenure in Atlanta, drafted the best rookie in the class of 2024, and then couldn't even believe the offer? That's competence, which laps Chicago/Toronto/New Orleans/Phoenix.

RE Powell to Miami for almost nothing

Do you guys think this archetype, and a player having a career year in their 30s, is going to hold much value? I don't.

RE Bane dealt for so much draft capital

I think Bane is as good as players like Jaylen Brown and other sub-all-stars. No problem with trading picks. Trading picks aren't an issue when you are adding a Rudy Gobert, Desmond Bane, or Pascal Siakam type, where you believe they are the missing piece.

Trading 2 starts and all your picks for Kevin Durant when you have no other roster around KD/Booker? That's a disaster. Being able to parse the differences between the two situations is key. Orlando, Minnesota, and Indiana didn't sacrifice their core to add a star or pseudo-star. Phoenix did.

In fact, you should go look at what the Timberwolves actually traded for Gobert and what Indiana actually traded for Siakam. It's pennies on the dollar, mostly middling prospects and players who will be out of the NBA in 5 years.

RE Poole for CJ

I think most people on the internet over-index on the present. Poole had a bad year in 2024. He was good this year. He was good in 2022. That's how I feel about KCP, he has one mediocre shooting season, and the last 8 years of priors are thrown out the window?

[ReggiesKnicks]

I suggested trading Siakam for KD mid-season. That's my biggest misvaluation, underselling my own team's players.

[165bows]

In the last six months we've seen a ton of deals we'd laugh at on the board. Of course, there are always outliers. But the deals we've seen recently seem SO FAR off from what we'd accept here as a fair deal, there has to be some explanation to the gap.

Luka deal
Holiday for Simons (and Port throws in 2nds-which I know were rescinded)
The ATL-NO deal (NO ONE on this Board would go for this)
Powell to Miami for almost nothing
Bane dealt for so much draft capital
Sexton for Nurkic, plus Utah adds a 2nd
Poole for CJ

Of course, GM's are must more aware of what's going on, and have a ton more info than we do. You could explain some of these, but where are we off? Or, are many GM's just idiots?

Common thread w a lot of these is the truism that positionally pigeon holed two guards that aren’t well above average offensive efficiency aren’t worth much, esp if they aren’t well above average defenders (which is hard these days for even good defenders pigeon holed at one position).

The two guard spot is fading from the league. I learned this btw from Dean Demakis back in the day.

[jbk1234]

I feel like the biggest disconnect is with fans not adjusting expectations after players have been made available and/or are obvious trade candidates, and yet remain on the roster.

Both Sexton and Simons had been reported to have been made available (Sexton more than once), and they remained on their respective teams despite those teams wanting to move on from them. The Kings have a number of players who have been shopped hard. They're still there. After awhile, it ceases to be a theoretical exercise. A player has a market, or not.

[HornetJail]

GMs aren't running their teams based on consensus valuations. They are as liable to fall in love with a random player and pay too much for them (or hate them and sell them cheap) as we are, and possibly more so when you're dealing with these guys up close and personal. You're dealing with massive egos behind the scenes as well, whether it's players, agents, owners, or the GMs themselves.

And then every now and then you get some GMs that are simply not good at their jobs at all (*cough* Dumars *cough*) and have a completely warped view of their own teams.

[theBigLip]

Think honestly CBA killed free agency.

It didn’t help but this was trending before the new CBA. Players/agents got smart and maximized their salaries by extending w their current team without concern for their or their team’s future. Once they got the money, they could push their way out to another team. That’s a much less risky path than becoming an UFA.

[BK_2020]

A lot of people really overestimate player value, especially one-dimensional scorers or 3 and D wings with no 3 or D.
Another overvalued commodity is future pick. "Variance" is thrown around as a way to justify pushing up future pick or swap's value but no one applies the same principle to value the assets being bought with those future picks.

[kobe_vs_jordan]

Think honestly CBA killed free agency. Sign and trade is so limiting now. Players have way less options driving down their value. Getting rid of the 125 percent rule makes it so much harder to dump money.

Think we seeing similar value driven down in trades. Players have less options on the open market. Not as many teams could make a trade for stars now like they could on old CBA .


Players use to be picking from 6 to 10 teams in free agency or trade market. Now you lucky if 2 or 3 teams can afford you.

Actually the CBA did exactly what it was designed to do - level the playing field.

The actual fans that are ticked off about this are Lakers/Boston et al who can no longer simply out spend the smaller markets to steal players and treat the small markets as farm teams.

And look at this past finals - two small market teams. Definitely a successful result.

What stops small markets spending besides cheap owners?

Okc was in the finals with the old CBA. That’s what good ownership does lol

[kobe_vs_jordan]

Think honestly CBA killed free agency.

It didn’t help but this was trending before the new CBA. Players/agents got smart and maximized their salaries by extending w their current team without concern for their or their team’s future. Once they got the money, they could push their way out to another team. That’s a much less risky path than becoming an UFA.

Good point there. Very true. This has become common place. Sign an extension then request a trade.

[longfellow44]

Think honestly CBA killed free agency. Sign and trade is so limiting now. Players have way less options driving down their value. Getting rid of the 125 percent rule makes it so much harder to dump money.

Think we seeing similar value driven down in trades. Players have less options on the open market. Not as many teams could make a trade for stars now like they could on old CBA .


Players use to be picking from 6 to 10 teams in free agency or trade market. Now you lucky if 2 or 3 teams can afford you.

Actually the CBA did exactly what it was designed to do - level the playing field.

The actual fans that are ticked off about this are Lakers/Boston et al who can no longer simply out spend the smaller markets to steal players and treat the small markets as farm teams.

And look at this past finals - two small market teams. Definitely a successful result.

What stops small markets spending besides cheap owners?

Okc was in the finals with the old CBA. That’s what good ownership does lol

One of the big things that stops teams from small markets spending as much is a distinct lack of televised games. The kings are lucky to get 1 nationally televised game per year. That directly impacts revenue, which impacts a team owners willingness to spend money.

National visibility is really important to how teams are able to spend money. The more nationally televised games a team has the more revenue that team will generate, the more money the team will have available to spend.

Teams like the lakers, and celtics will have more nationally televised games when they are a bottom dweller than most small market teams with a 500 record.

The new CBA helps to level that playing field a little bit. Thats why boston is selling this year when they know that they can't win without Tatum. The threat of having to pay such large tax penaltys is a real motivator. Under previous CBA's they likely wouldn't have traded Holiday or Porzingas.

[Ron Swanson]

Yes, some GM's really just are "dumb, short-sighted, need to sell tickets, doing ownership's bidding, etc." But I think it really is as simple as posters on this board and this entire site in general being prone to obsess over and overvalue the absolute crap out of draft picks and "youth" while severely undervaluing established (re: good) players. Where this is at its most extreme is the discussion around the absolute upper tier (All-NBA) players, because there's few other places on the internet where I can see a legit Top-15 type player be treated like he's a borderline negative asset for such specious and flippant reasoning, which is usually something along the lines of:

- Anybody over the age of 30 is "about to decline"
- "His contract is a hindrance"
- "We can't give up a lot because our team around him would suck"
- The player "has all the leverage" so just take our bad offer cuz he wants to come here.

And then when even a Top-40ish guy gets moved for like 5-6 firsts and swaps (and pick swaps are THE absolute most overrated "asset"), so many here act surprised that front offices don't value that stuff the same way we do. Reality is that teams tend to value good basketball players over the complete mystery box of "potential" in the vast majority of situations (their job is to actually build a competitive basketball team after all). Like, look no further than however many times we see 1st round picks 4-5 years away described as "juicy" (weird....and gross) in trade threads here. We as fans aren't operating on the same timeline, nor with the same available info.

[kobe_vs_jordan]

Actually the CBA did exactly what it was designed to do - level the playing field.

The actual fans that are ticked off about this are Lakers/Boston et al who can no longer simply out spend the smaller markets to steal players and treat the small markets as farm teams.

And look at this past finals - two small market teams. Definitely a successful result.

What stops small markets spending besides cheap owners?

Okc was in the finals with the old CBA. That’s what good ownership does lol

One of the big things that stops teams from small markets spending as much is a distinct lack of televised games. The kings are lucky to get 1 nationally televised game per year. That directly impacts revenue, which impacts a team owners willingness to spend money.

National visibility is really important to how teams are able to spend money. The more nationally televised games a team has the more revenue that team will generate, the more money the team will have available to spend.

Teams like the lakers, and celtics will have more nationally televised games when they are a bottom dweller than most small market teams with a 500 record.

The new CBA helps to level that playing field a little bit. Thats why boston is selling this year when they know that they can't win without Tatum. The threat of having to pay such large tax penaltys is a real motivator. Under previous CBA's they likely wouldn't have traded Holiday or Porzingas.

National games revenue is spilt equally between all teams though. Big markets are the ones losing out here.

Teams get to keep their local media rights revenue.

The “big market” advantage is just a non cheap owner. If Balmer owned the pelicans, i don’t think he going to say i can’t pay luxury tax bc we aren’t selling enough jerseys.