Anthony Parker's trade value

bill russell · Post #1 » by **bill russell** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:09 am

AP's got his game back, just in time for the trade deadline. He's playing well, scoring well, shooting a very high percentage from three, he defends, and he's not expensive. A lot of teams could use him. Given that we're building for the long-term and he's 32(?), is he someone we might look to deal (individually or in a package). If so, what might we get for him?

omeloon · Post #2 » by **omeloon** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:33 am

Utah was our best chance to move him for something of value, but Philly swooped in before us.

inrapscity · Post #3 » by **inrapscity** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:33 am

i doubt that we're looking to deal AP but it's always possible if the right deal came along.

hard to grasp AP's value but he'll be a valuable filler in a trade, that's for sure.

bill russell · Post #4 » by **bill russell** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:37 am

omeloon -- you mean you would have trade AP for giricek? i must be missing something. isn't that trading down?

zong · Post #5 » by **zong** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:37 am

I think Parker would be a nice SF on a Western Conference team needing his stability and consistency, Denver reminds me of one, and although the Cavs arent in the West, they could really use him as well

omeloon · Post #6 » by **omeloon** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:40 am

bill russell wrote:omeloon -- you mean you would have trade AP for giricek? i must be missing something. isn't that trading down?

Oh no, sorry... I don't want to trade Parker at all. If we were too, I can't see any other team willing to give up more than Utah though. If they offered their first pick this upcoming draft, I MIGHT have budged.

jonny three time · Post #7 » by **jonny three time** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:51 am

I'm of the opinion that the Raptors should be looking at the future and not be short sighted. But they should take that approach in developing the talent that is already here, not by getting more young players. You need some vets on the team for the sake of stability and keeping the teams B-ball IQ high. If we got rid of any key vets right now it could be a risky move as the team could start becoming dysfunctional. This team has some problems, but lets not just throw in the towel.

It's not like trading Parker would bring back the kind of guy BC couldn't find through some other means.

Jamz18 · Post #8 » by **Jamz18** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:58 am

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... YOU GUYS MAKE ME LAUGH..... TRADE AP..... THATS A JOKEEE

N1QUE24 · Post #9 » by **N1QUE24** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:32 am

AP + Dixon for Jamal Crawford.

Get it done BC.

Haters: Sit.

Ackshun · Post #10 » by **Ackshun** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:35 am

yeah not a very thought out thread.

parker brings it every night. He did try a few new things this season that hasn't work out, but he's back in game shape.

im not trading parker unless im getting a center. there will be no lateral movements just for the sake

DIEHARD_005 · Post #11 » by **DIEHARD_005** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:49 am

N1QUE24 wrote:AP + Dixon for Jamal Crawford.

Get it done BC.

Haters: Sit.

You really want to see JC in a Raps uni, don't you?

When TJ first went down I was playing around with the trade checker and found that AP+Dixon+rights to Ukic to CHI for Duhon was good under the salary cap. Seeing AP's play of late I would think that AP+Dixon's expiring contract and possibly a first rounder sometime down the road would be a decent offer for Duhon. But hopefully TJ will be back soon (knock on wood) so no need to explore that further

Mr. Perfect · Post #12 » by **Mr. Perfect** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:51 am

Anthony Parker + Rasho for Nene.

Get 'er done BC.

dinosaur_dan · Post #13 » by **dinosaur_dan** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 6:07 am

Ummmmm no. Parker is reliable on an unreliable team. Why would we move him? He's part of the solution, not the problem.

torontoaces04 · Post #14 » by **torontoaces04** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 6:17 am

N1QUE24 wrote:AP + Dixon for Jamal Crawford.

Get it done BC.

Haters: Sit.

you sure do love your knicks players eh n1que? first with the eddy + jamal = saviour threads, now this??

N1QUE24 · Post #15 » by **N1QUE24** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 6:35 am

I think if those players are put into the right situation, they can flourish.

Of course, them being players in the Knicks.. they automatically get a bad rep but I think with the right system, right coach, Curry and Crawford would benefit this team.

But thats just my opinion, and I know others think im crazy but its all good.

whoknows · Post #16 » by **whoknows** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:45 pm

AP doesn't go since he is undervalued outside Toronto.

Unfortunately some of the posters here don't see his true team value.

We're better off keeping him.

bill russell · Post #17 » by **bill russell** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:28 pm

I understand why you'd want experienced players on a young team but we've got garbo coming back towards the end of this season and next year. What's more, jose and TJ and bosh will all have three, four or five years under their belts by the end of next season -- how much babysitting do we need?
And I do see AP's team value -- that's one of things that makes him tradeable.
Everyone on this board wants to make a deal but no one wants to give up anything but spare parts. It would be nice if BC can keep pulling rabbits (like humphreys) out of hats but sooner or later if you want to get a known quantity for your team you have to give something up. I don't want to give anything from the core. AP is the best piece we have that doesn't figure in our future. Why not trade him for someone who might?

Post #18 » by **Morris_Shatford** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:09 pm

N1QUE24 wrote:I think if those players are put into the right situation, they can flourish.

Of course, them being players in the Knicks.. they automatically get a bad rep but I think with the right system, right coach, Curry and Crawford would benefit this team.

But thats just my opinion, and I know others think im crazy but its all good.

Don't the three years they both have left on their contracts worry you at all?

I mean I like Crawford, but adding him AND Curry would put us in a position where the core of our rosters was under contract till 2011, and if for some reason it didn't work out we may find our team in the same situation we were in when Rob Babcock took over,

Cap Hell Baby,

ruckus · Post #19 » by **ruckus** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:58 pm

bill russell wrote:I understand why you'd want experienced players on a young team but we've got garbo coming back towards the end of this season and next year. What's more, jose and TJ and bosh will all have three, four or five years under their belts by the end of next season -- how much babysitting do we need?
And I do see AP's team value -- that's one of things that makes him tradeable.
Everyone on this board wants to make a deal but no one wants to give up anything but spare parts. It would be nice if BC can keep pulling rabbits (like humphreys) out of hats but sooner or later if you want to get a known quantity for your team you have to give something up. I don't want to give anything from the core. AP is the best piece we have that doesn't figure in our future. Why not trade him for someone who might?

It makes sense. We would probably still be hovering around .500 with or without AP. The only issue I see comes with the veteran leadership argument. AP's contract is too low to get back something of value unless its someone on a rookie contract or is on a undervalued contract. Therefore, you'd probably want to move him with Rasho. AP + Rasho may bring back something significant. But, if you do that, then, you lose 2 veteran leaders. However, with Rasho's reduced role this season, I'm not sure how much impact losing him would make. It would definitely put more pressure on Bargs to step up his game.

So, what could we get back for AP and Rasho combined salary for $12 Mil?

Hank_Scorpio · Post #20 » by **Hank_Scorpio** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:48 pm

I think it would be a mistake to trade Parker this season.

But next season I think he is definite trade bait - he is a pro's pro with a reasonable expiring contract. If Colangelo could get a couple of young guys off a contender looking to add a piece for their run for Parker, I think that would be a great move.

But right now, I look at this team as still being on the up slope in terms of changing the dynamics of the franchise, and Parker plays a key role in that.

Again, if we pull up our handy Pyramid of Success, look at it in terms of Parker:

I would say that, for his career, Parker is perhaps the ONLY player on this team that has, at some point, made it to the top of the pyramid as a pro. Calderon and Garbajosa have done it for Spain and Dixon did it with Maryland, but that's really it. Rasho has won a championship, but he was not a key player in that win, so that doesn't count.

This is why you do not so easily dump a player like Parker. His impact on the team in terms of his professionalism, dedication, and work ethic cannot be estimated in numbers.

And since its pretty clear the Raps are not winning a championship this year, its really just a question of whether you continue to strengthen the foundation (keep Parker) or whether its time to move on to building the house (trade Parker for prospects).

Me? I'm keeping at work on the foundation this season and next if I can. But then again, I live in LA and have to worry about earthquakes.