Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXVIII

[penbeast0]

If ...Williams has too much value, then what about a simplified version:

Washington trades: Ian Mahinmi, CJ Miles, Ish Smith,
Washington receives: Gordon Hayward

OKC trades: Steven Adams
OKC receives: Ian Mahinmi, CJ Miles

Boston trades: Gordon Hayward
Boston receives: Steven Adams, Ish Smith

OKC dumps Adams for expirings. Boston moves Hayward for Adams. The Wizards turn expiring contracts and future flexibility into Hayward. As I said before, OKC can save even more immediate money if Ish goes to OKC and Miles goes to Boston instead, but I was assuming OKC didn't want the extra PG.

Ultimately, I don't think Adams has much value. Dumping him for cap relief seems about right. Good defensive centers with minimal offensive game besides rim running are not worth $27M. Willie Cauley-Stein was just signed for the vet minimum. Looney got $5M a year. Robin Lopez got $5M a year.

I agree that Adams is way overpaid; it's a great point. But, I still don't quite see how this trade works for Boston -- what am I missing?

They move $67m in salary over 2 years. But they take back @$65.5m for the same period. Moreover, Hayward is likely to produce more on-court benefit than Smith/Adams, no?

Plus, they already have Enes Kanter, Williams, Daniel Theis & Tacko Fall on their roster this year.

If Boston, like me, thinks Williams can play, it doesn't make sense (I don't think Theis and Fall are significant enough talents to make a significant difference at C). If, like others, you think Boston needs a strong defensive center to pair with Kanter and that Hayword is not going to be anything more than replacement level at the 3 (or 4), then Adams does have a much stronger on court benefit and will help them tremendously.

Depends on your talent evaluation of the Boston players because I think we all agree that the Wiz aren't giving up anything much more than expiring contracts.

[payitforward]

If Boston, like me, thinks Williams can play, it doesn't make sense (I don't think Theis and Fall are significant enough talents to make a significant difference at C). If, like others, you think Boston needs a strong defensive center to pair with Kanter and that Hayword is not going to be anything more than replacement level at the 3 (or 4), then Adams does have a much stronger on court benefit and will help them tremendously.

Depends on your talent evaluation of the Boston players because I think we all agree that the Wiz aren't giving up anything much more than expiring contracts.

Williams is a very good prospect; I see no reason to think anyone would be giving up on him.

They just gave Theis 2 guaranteed years at $5m a year, so I'm guessing they have a different view of him than yours. They also may know more about him as a player than either you or I do. I'd guess so on that one too, wouldn't you? But, you're right that Tacko Fall is irrelevant.

As to Hayward, if he is a "replacement level" player what is the point of this discussion -- which is about trading for him? Yes, we wouldn't give up "anything much more than expiring contracts," but we'd be taking on $67m of salary.

In fact, Gordon Hayward was actually quite good last year. He didn't shoot as much as typical for his career, to be sure, but he scored more points than an average 3, & he scored them at higher efficiency than an average 3. In fact, he posted the highest 2pt. FG% of his career, & he shot 83+% from the line.

As well, last year Hayward had the best rebounding year of his career. On both ends of the court. Not to mention that he averaged 5.25 assists per 40 minutes.

This is a guy who has been an extremely good player his whole career. He had one of his best years last year, so I don't think he's in much danger of playing at a "replacement level."

[penbeast0]

If Boston, like me, thinks Williams can play, it doesn't make sense (I don't think Theis and Fall are significant enough talents to make a significant difference at C). If, like others, you think Boston needs a strong defensive center to pair with Kanter and that Hayword is not going to be anything more than replacement level at the 3 (or 4), then Adams does have a much stronger on court benefit and will help them tremendously.

Depends on your talent evaluation of the Boston players because I think we all agree that the Wiz aren't giving up anything much more than expiring contracts.

Williams is a very good prospect; I see no reason to think anyone would be giving up on him.

They just gave Theis 2 guaranteed years at $5m a year, so I'm guessing they have a different view of him than yours. They also may know more about him as a player than either you or I do. I'd guess so on that one too, wouldn't you? But, you're right that Tacko Fall is irrelevant.

As to Hayward, if he is a "replacement level" player what is the point of this discussion -- which is about trading for him? Yes, we wouldn't give up "anything much more than expiring contracts," but we'd be taking on $67m of salary.

In fact, Gordon Hayward was actually quite good last year. He didn't shoot as much as typical for his career, to be sure, but he scored more points than an average 3, & he scored them at higher efficiency than an average 3. In fact, he posted the highest 2pt. FG% of his career, & he shot 83+% from the line.

As well, last year Hayward had the best rebounding year of his career. On both ends of the court. Not to mention that he averaged 5.25 assists per 40 minutes.

This is a guy who has been an extremely good player his whole career. He had one of his best years last year, so I don't think he's in much danger of playing at a "replacement level."

AS I said, if Hayward has real potential, Boston isn't getting enough relief/help to move him; if Williams has real potential, I don't see that potential either. Theis looks like a solid bench 4, not a guy who can provide major minutes at the 5, particularly defensively, not a bad player but not particularly relevant. Williams last year had very nice numbers. You don't get a 2nd year player with starter potential and a potential borderline all-star (even if being paid like a perennial all-star) for the likes of Mahinmi and Miles even if expiring unless the other team is desperate for space for an immediate signing. The only way this works is if Hayward is seen as pretty much dead money (then Williams is the price for dumping him) and even then the Celtics might not move Williams if they see him as a potential starter rather than a potential solid backup.

That was pretty much my point, sorry if I wasn't clear.

[Ruzious]

If Boston, like me, thinks Williams can play, it doesn't make sense (I don't think Theis and Fall are significant enough talents to make a significant difference at C). If, like others, you think Boston needs a strong defensive center to pair with Kanter and that Hayword is not going to be anything more than replacement level at the 3 (or 4), then Adams does have a much stronger on court benefit and will help them tremendously.

Depends on your talent evaluation of the Boston players because I think we all agree that the Wiz aren't giving up anything much more than expiring contracts.

Williams is a very good prospect; I see no reason to think anyone would be giving up on him.

They just gave Theis 2 guaranteed years at $5m a year, so I'm guessing they have a different view of him than yours. They also may know more about him as a player than either you or I do. I'd guess so on that one too, wouldn't you? But, you're right that Tacko Fall is irrelevant.

As to Hayward, if he is a "replacement level" player what is the point of this discussion -- which is about trading for him? Yes, we wouldn't give up "anything much more than expiring contracts," but we'd be taking on $67m of salary.

In fact, Gordon Hayward was actually quite good last year. He didn't shoot as much as typical for his career, to be sure, but he scored more points than an average 3, & he scored them at higher efficiency than an average 3. In fact, he posted the highest 2pt. FG% of his career, & he shot 83+% from the line.

As well, last year Hayward had the best rebounding year of his career. On both ends of the court. Not to mention that he averaged 5.25 assists per 40 minutes.

This is a guy who has been an extremely good player his whole career. He had one of his best years last year, so I don't think he's in much danger of playing at a "replacement level."

AS I said, if Hayward has real potential, Boston isn't getting enough relief/help to move him; if Williams has real potential, I don't see that potential either. Theis looks like a solid bench 4, not a guy who can provide major minutes at the 5, particularly defensively, not a bad player but not particularly relevant. Williams last year had very nice numbers. You don't get a 2nd year player with starter potential and a potential borderline all-star (even if being paid like a perennial all-star) for the likes of Mahinmi and Miles even if expiring unless the other team is desperate for space for an immediate signing. The only way this works is if Hayward is seen as pretty much dead money (then Williams is the price for dumping him) and even then the Celtics might not move Williams if they see him as a potential starter rather than a potential solid backup.

That was pretty much my point, sorry if I wasn't clear.

A couple of outside issues might (significantly?) diminish Williams' trade value: One is reports that he fell in the draft because of concerns about his work ethic. Two is - per Wikipedia, "In July 2018, Williams was revealed to have popliteal artery entrapment syndrome (PAES) in both legs. If it degenerates, the vascular disease could require a surgical procedure in the future."

[payitforward]

If Boston, like me, thinks Williams can play, it doesn't make sense (I don't think Theis and Fall are significant enough talents to make a significant difference at C). If, like others, you think Boston needs a strong defensive center to pair with Kanter and that Hayword is not going to be anything more than replacement level at the 3 (or 4), then Adams does have a much stronger on court benefit and will help them tremendously.

Depends on your talent evaluation of the Boston players because I think we all agree that the Wiz aren't giving up anything much more than expiring contracts.

Williams is a very good prospect; I see no reason to think anyone would be giving up on him.

They just gave Theis 2 guaranteed years at $5m a year, so I'm guessing they have a different view of him than yours. They also may know more about him as a player than either you or I do. I'd guess so on that one too, wouldn't you? But, you're right that Tacko Fall is irrelevant.

As to Hayward, if he is a "replacement level" player what is the point of this discussion -- which is about trading for him? Yes, we wouldn't give up "anything much more than expiring contracts," but we'd be taking on $67m of salary.

In fact, Gordon Hayward was actually quite good last year. He didn't shoot as much as typical for his career, to be sure, but he scored more points than an average 3, & he scored them at higher efficiency than an average 3. In fact, he posted the highest 2pt. FG% of his career, & he shot 83+% from the line.

As well, last year Hayward had the best rebounding year of his career. On both ends of the court. Not to mention that he averaged 5.25 assists per 40 minutes.

This is a guy who has been an extremely good player his whole career. He had one of his best years last year, so I don't think he's in much danger of playing at a "replacement level."

AS I said, if Hayward has real potential, Boston isn't getting enough relief/help to move him; if Williams has real potential, I don't see that potential either. Theis looks like a solid bench 4, not a guy who can provide major minutes at the 5, particularly defensively, not a bad player but not particularly relevant. Williams last year had very nice numbers. You don't get a 2nd year player with starter potential and a potential borderline all-star (even if being paid like a perennial all-star) for the likes of Mahinmi and Miles even if expiring unless the other team is desperate for space for an immediate signing. The only way this works is if Hayward is seen as pretty much dead money (then Williams is the price for dumping him) and even then the Celtics might not move Williams if they see him as a potential starter rather than a potential solid backup.

That was pretty much my point, sorry if I wasn't clear.

Aaaahhh -- in short, we are in violent agreement!

[payitforward]

I do recall Williams managing to miss his plane to Boston after the draft...

Obviously, gotta hope that arterial thingamabob doesn't screw life up for him.

I think by now we've squared the circle of nate's blue-sky trade speculation anyway!

[payitforward]

TC starts on Tuesday -- what can we think up to argue about between now & then?

[payitforward]

The Hornets did not pick up Willy Hernangomez's option last year, so he is expiring. We need a backup Center, & he is a pretty interesting option who's available cheap. He had a very good 2016-17 rookie year w/ the Knicks, playing @1300+ minutes. For some reason he hasn't earned consistent minutes since then. Yet, his numbers look good.

We could give them Mahinmi, Wagner & McRae, & take back Hernangomez & Biyombo (who like Mahinmi is expiring).

For Charlotte: lose no one they care about while acquiring a guy who was a R1 pick last year. Get a backup 1 - 2 in the bargain.
For Wizards: fill our need at backup Center & fix our roster squeeze (i.e. we can keep Jones).

Make any sense at all?

Edit: down side for us is that we lose McRae, whom some people here like. Even if you like McRae, the trade seems justified easily by the upgrade from Wagner to Hernangomez.

A subsidiary benefit is that moving McRae means there'll be PT for young guys we want to learn about: Bonga, Robinson & Jones.

[penbeast0]

This is predicated on Wagner being the complete bust he looked in summer league of course . . . but then why would they value him either?

[payitforward]

This is predicated on Wagner being the complete bust he looked in summer league of course . . . but then why would they value him either?

Beats me. But... somehow, guys who were R1 picks do seem to get more chances than guys who were R2 or went undrafted. Somehow, the label "R1 pick" sticks to them & makes them seem extra valuable.

[DCZards]

The Hornets did not pick up Willy Hernangomez's option last year, so he is expiring. We need a backup Center, & he is a pretty interesting option who's available cheap. He had a very good 2016-17 rookie year w/ the Knicks, playing @1300+ minutes. For some reason he hasn't earned consistent minutes since then. Yet, his numbers look good.

We could give them Mahinmi, Wagner & McRae, & take back Hernangomez & Biyombo (who like Mahinmi is expiring).

For Charlotte: lose no one they care about while acquiring a guy who was a R1 pick last year. Get a backup 1 - 2 in the bargain.
For Wizards: fill our need at backup Center & fix our roster squeeze (i.e. we can keep Jones).

Make any sense at all?

Edit: down side for us is that we lose McRae, whom some people here like. Even if you like McRae, the trade seems justified easily by the upgrade from Wagner to Hernangomez.

A subsidiary benefit is that moving McRae means there'll be PT for young guys we want to learn about: Bonga, Robinson & Jones.

I’m one of those people who like McRae. He’s instant offense off the bench and he showed at the end of last season that he can also handle and create for himself and others.

Your suggestion that moving McRae means more PT for Bonga, Robinson and Jones actually makes me even more eager to keep McRae.

I know the Zards are in tank mode but I’d still like to see them at least try to win 30 or so games. For that reason, I don’t want to have to depend on Bonga, Robinson or Jones to replace McRae’s scoring off the bench.

[nate33]

The Hornets did not pick up Willy Hernangomez's option last year, so he is expiring. We need a backup Center, & he is a pretty interesting option who's available cheap. He had a very good 2016-17 rookie year w/ the Knicks, playing @1300+ minutes. For some reason he hasn't earned consistent minutes since then. Yet, his numbers look good.

We could give them Mahinmi, Wagner & McRae, & take back Hernangomez & Biyombo (who like Mahinmi is expiring).

For Charlotte: lose no one they care about while acquiring a guy who was a R1 pick last year. Get a backup 1 - 2 in the bargain.
For Wizards: fill our need at backup Center & fix our roster squeeze (i.e. we can keep Jones).

Make any sense at all?

Edit: down side for us is that we lose McRae, whom some people here like. Even if you like McRae, the trade seems justified easily by the upgrade from Wagner to Hernangomez.

A subsidiary benefit is that moving McRae means there'll be PT for young guys we want to learn about: Bonga, Robinson & Jones.

Hernandogomez seems like a nice guy to target. I don't know if we need a trade this complicated. Why not just swap Bonga for Hernandogomez straight up? Charlotte gives up a guy they clearly don't care about in exchange for a flyer on a longshot athletic talent at a position of need.

That said, it gives me pause that Hernandogomez plays so little despite having terrific per minute numbers. Are those numbers just inflated by garbage time? Or is he horrendous on defense at things that don't show up in the box score? I note that he ranks very poorly in ESPN's RPM stat. He's 65th out of 70 centers in total RPM and he ranks dead last in DRPM - way behind 69th ranked Enes Kanter. Ouch! Can Wagner really be worse defensively?

[payitforward]

The Hornets did not pick up Willy Hernangomez's option last year, so he is expiring. We need a backup Center, & he is a pretty interesting option who's available cheap. He had a very good 2016-17 rookie year w/ the Knicks, playing @1300+ minutes. For some reason he hasn't earned consistent minutes since then. Yet, his numbers look good.

We could give them Mahinmi, Wagner & McRae, & take back Hernangomez & Biyombo (who like Mahinmi is expiring).

For Charlotte: lose no one they care about while acquiring a guy who was a R1 pick last year. Get a backup 1 - 2 in the bargain.
For Wizards: fill our need at backup Center & fix our roster squeeze (i.e. we can keep Jones).

Make any sense at all?

Edit: down side for us is that we lose McRae, whom some people here like. Even if you like McRae, the trade seems justified easily by the upgrade from Wagner to Hernangomez.

A subsidiary benefit is that moving McRae means there'll be PT for young guys we want to learn about: Bonga, Robinson & Jones.

I’m one of those people who like McRae. He’s instant offense off the bench and he showed at the end of last season that he can also handle and create for himself and others.

Your suggestion that moving McRae means more PT for Bonga, Robinson and Jones actually makes me even more eager to keep McRae.

I know the Zards are in tank mode but I’d still like to see them at least try to win 30 or so games. For that reason, I don’t want to have to depend on Bonga, Robinson or Jones to replace McRae’s scoring off the bench.

Zards -- you left out an important part of my trade idea -- the part where we get something --

Not to mention the part where we don't put Mo Wagner on the floor.

In fact, I would be quite confident that the Wizards would win more games -- maybe as many as 5 more games -- after making this trade than they would without the trade (not that we'll ever be able to know whether I'm right, since there's no chance of this trade hapening). Why?

1. Bismack Biyombo is way better than Ian Mahinmi.
2. Hernangomez is way better than Wagner.

Replacing Mahinmi & Wagner with Biyombo & Hernangomez -- even using no more than the total of @950 minutes that Ian & Mo played last year -- would be likely to contribute about 3 extra wins.

As to McRae -- I've said this before: I also like Jordan McRae. I like him too. I am not suggesting trading Jordan McRae in this deal because I want to get rid of Jordan McRae. In fact, as I've also said before, Jordan McRae was on my radar before anyone else here ever heard of him (& if someone is the one exception, or 3 of you are the 3 exceptions, or whatever... no problem -- you get my point).

But, I do think you are over-estimating him. His numbers last year weren't good. There were simply some occasions on which he produced pretty well.

Still, I'm happy to grant that he would be an adequately useful bench player in the role he had last year -- 12.5 minutes a game. It's also possible he'd get better. He's 28, so lets not be unrealistic. But, he could improve -- why not?

&, of course, if Bonga, Robinson & Jones play those minutes instead of him, they could be absolutely horrible! In which case, no doubt, we'd give back those extra wins I mentioned above.

But... what if they're not "absolutely horrible"? What if they're pretty good? It's by no means inconceivable that they'd be better than McRae rather than worse. In which case, we win even more games. &, in fact, I would be pretty surprised if Jemerrio Jones weren't a ton better than Jordan McRae.

But, hey, all this is just sky-writing; the wind will blow it away. This is a trade that will never happen.

[payitforward]

Hernandogomez seems like a nice guy to target. I don't know if we need a trade this complicated. Why not just swap Bonga for Hernandogomez straight up? Charlotte gives up a guy they clearly don't care about in exchange for a flyer on a longshot athletic talent at a position of need.

That said, it gives me pause that Hernandogomez plays so little despite having terrific per minute numbers. Are those numbers just inflated by garbage time? Or is he horrendous on defense at things that don't show up in the box score? I note that he ranks very poorly in ESPN's RPM stat. He's 65th out of 70 centers in total RPM and he ranks dead last in DRPM - way behind 69th ranked Enes Kanter. Ouch! Can Wagner really be worse defensively?

To me, the single biggest benefit of this trade is to move Wagner. Hence I don't like your simpler version as well as my suggested package.

Look at the orpm/drpm numbers for Hernangomez in his rookie year when he played 1325 minutes -- a more meaningful sample. They're better.

Only thing is... how much weight can you give to a metric that is just mystery meat? No explanation of how it's calculated.

Consider this: the other day, talking about Steven Adams being overpaid, you placed Kevon Looney on a list of defensive-minded Centers with little offensive game (if I remember correctly). But, using total ORPM, he ranks as the 7th highest Offensive RPM of all 70 Centers in the league last year. Thomas Bryant, who scored more points than Looney at a higher TS%, ranks 14th.

Overall, RPM has Kevon Looney as the 9th best Center in the NBA -- out of 70. Thomas Bryant is ranked 27 out of 70.

I love Kevon Looney. I think he's great. CCJ & I wanted us to draft him in 2015. But, I'd say that overall Bryant had a slightly better season last year than Looney.

Hence, I have very little faith in RPM. What Hernangomez's low ranking means... I don't know.

[I_Like_Dirt]

That said, it gives me pause that Hernandogomez plays so little despite having terrific per minute numbers. Are those numbers just inflated by garbage time? Or is he horrendous on defense at things that don't show up in the box score? I note that he ranks very poorly in ESPN's RPM stat. He's 65th out of 70 centers in total RPM and he ranks dead last in DRPM - way behind 69th ranked Enes Kanter. Ouch! Can Wagner really be worse defensively?

It's always been an issue of defense with Willy Hernangomez. He's just so big that his read/react defense hasn't been up to par. And yes, Wagner can be worse. The level of defensive versatility required of modern bigs is higher than ever and it's challenging guys who could have been beasts back in the days of handchecking and illegal defenses when teams didn't take 3s so nobody even really had to bother starting to defend until 15 feet from the hoop unless they were guarding one of the few 3-point specialists on the floor.

[payitforward]

Interesting points.... Do you mean -- to some degree, at least -- that these kinds of defensive problems actually go with guys being really big? You seem to suggest that about Hernangomez. I.e. are you suggesting that in the current era, the way the game is played now & under current rules, bigs are likely, in general, to bring defensive problems with them when they take the floor? Tho, obviously, there will always be exceptions, as to any rule.

If that's what you mean to be suggesting, then the next question to ask is whether teams carry fewer bigs these days? & do those bigs play fewer minutes? That would be the common sense result of the above being true. &, intuitively, there's something to this -- e.g. we do seem to see more "small ball 5's."

Yet, if you started looking at the actual numbers, to what degree would it prove to prevalent? Obviously, to make a decision about Hernangomez or anyone, you'd need more of a quantitative picture, an analytic picture, of the situation -- something beyond the qualitative assessment.

It's definitely interesting. & if it's so -- &, essentially, it's been caused by changes in rules on defense -- then that might lead to some of those rule-changes being modified, partly rolled back. On the assumption, that is, that we want to see more bigs in basketball. (Maybe we don't?)

[I_Like_Dirt]

Yes, I do think that some of these defensive issues go along with these guys being really big. It doesn't mean players can't and don't overcome them but you're moving more mass a longer distance and putting more pressure on your joints. It's more difficult and also takes a more physical toll on players. That's part of having the most elite athletes at the sport in the world. Size, speed, strength, read/react, understanding, etc. is all a part of the equation.

There are some truly gifted and intelligent players out there like Al Horford and Marc Gasol that figure things out. It takes time to learn the game to do things more efficiently so your body doesn't break down, too. It takes time and the ability to learn how to do things more efficiently to avoid putting too much stress on your body. It's also much more effective when guys do figure things out defensively because running into a 6'3" guard isn't nearly as disruptive as running into some mountain that just happened to move into your path when you blinked. Combined with the fact that there are simply fewer giants in the world than other people and there's a reason that size still matters in the NBA. The NBA is just giving up on size for its own sake and looking more for the size along with skill/understanding. The league won't take a 7 footer without the quick fundamentals when they can get a 6'9" player with fundamentals now. And a 6'9" player who can't play defense is basically done.

And to be fair, that's always been true. It's just the degree to which it's true that is being accelerated now.

[payitforward]

What you write makes sense, of course. At the same time (as I'm sure you will agree), if you're a bit deficient at something, it really helps if you are extraordinarily proficient at something else!

OTOH, what you don't offer -- not that it's on you to spend the time it would take to do so! -- is a quantitative version of your point: numbers to support statements.

George Mikan couldn't play in the league these days. But, we've always known that. What did it for a player like him was the rule against goaltending -- which was introduced precisely to prevent the league being dominated by guys who were enormous &, however immobile, could simply prevent opponents' shots from going in the bucket.

Your examples of Horford & Marc Gasol are interesting: Horford is quite mobile, Gasol not.

[prime1time]

The league is in a very interesting place. A lot of young teams with young talent at redundant positions. Look at how many guards the Bulls and the Pelicans have. There's simply no way they can give all these guys minutes. It'd be interesting to see if Tommy is able to make things happen.

[payitforward]

The league is in a very interesting place. A lot of young teams with young talent at redundant positions. Look at how many guards the Bulls and the Pelicans have. There's simply no way they can give all these guys minutes. It'd be interesting to see if Tommy is able to make things happen.

Because rosters are limited to 15, if a team has too many players at a given position, then necessarily it has too few players at some other position(s). Trades are meant to ease this problem.

But... since you are going to get back as good as you give, if you want someone good you have to have someone good to trade. We have no one good to trade. So, no, Tommy isn't going to be able to "make things happen" with other teams. Maybe he can trade one of our few old bums (Mahinmi, Miles...) for a R2 pick at the deadline? That's it.

Last year we had a veteran team that won 32 games. There was no particular reason to bring back a single player from that team except Brad, John, & Mahinmi, who had a guaranteed contract, plus Bryant & Brown who were the exception: young players.

As I've said before: we will not be a good team again until we pay for every one of Ernie Grunfeld's mistakes. & he made a lot of them.