Jagger-meister wrote:Curns13 wrote:Jagger-meister wrote:
I said it was a bad trade. Bogs was by far the best player in that trade and his lack of defense isn't an issue on most teams that have defenders in the front court. Nicholson has barely played and we gave up one of our developmental players. Marks needs to learn how to draw the line because I think he lost both trades he's made. He sold off our two best players not named Lopez and didn't get good value for them.
You can't look at the trade as just Thad for LeVert. Marks immediately went out and got Booker (who would never have come to play behind Thad) and Booker's numbers are better than Thad's for the year. So Marks won the Thad for Booker and LeVert trade sequence.
Booker has nothing to do with the Thad trade. We could have easily signed him and kept Thad. Booker is also grossly overpaid for a extremely limited skill set.He's already losing time to RHJ who's playing out of position and Acy who is a better player IMO and making a fraction of what Booker is. PFs like Booker are a dime a dozen. I would rather not have Booker on this team even without Thad.
The fact Bogs fetched a 1st in a good draft is proof enough to me that he could have fetched a 1st in last year's draft, particularly the 1st the Hornets gave up for Belinelli. Bogs is the rich man's version of Belinelli and we could have used that route in order to get Levert instead of getting low value for Thad.
That isn't even bringing up that Levert wasn't considered a first rounder by any major draft for caster. Getting poor value on the trade, not knowing the market even though Charlotte had engaged us at the deadline about Bogs, and reaching for Levert was a job done poorly. Even if Levert turns out to be a stud it's still dumb to reach like that. Draymond Green would be a top pick if they went back and redrafted his draft class. What makes him a good pick is that he was selected with a 2nd round pick. That's where the value comes from. Not getting max value for you assets is how you end up as the worst team in the NBA.
Booker has a lot to do with the Thad trade, because he is the player who has played most of Thad's minutes. Thad is the fourth best player on a .500 team, putting up similar numbers to Booker while having a similar impact. Yes, the Nets could have gotten Booker while keeping Thad, but why would they want to do that? You get Booker a similar impact player to Thad who costs 3/4 as much, and when you add in LeVert, the Nets won the trade easily.
The fact Bogs fetched a first in a good draft isn't proof enough that he could have fetched a 1st in last year's draft, including the 1st the Hornets gave up for Belinelli unless you are Cho their GM. Player value differs from gm to gm, that's why there are so many overpaid busts out there. It seems more likely to me, that if they could have gotten Charlotte's first for Bogs, then they would have going from what Marks has done so far. And if they did, they still would have traded Thad to the Pacers so they could have 2 first round picks like they do this year. Marks has a better feel for the market of one of his players by talking to other gms than a fan does by reading what sports writers and other fans write.
It's not dumb to reach for a player you believe in if there is any chance they can be taken before you can draft again. And unless you are a mind reader, you don't know what value other gm's had placed on LeVert regardless of what "writers" mock drafts predicted.
What matters is the results. LeVert, so far looks like a good pick for when he was taken.
What makes Green a good pick isn't just that he was selected with a 2nd round pick. If he was taken in the first round, he still would have been a good pick. If there was a gm who really liked Green and could have picked him late in the first, but thought I'm sure he will come back to us later in the second. What would you think of that gm?
