Kobblehead wrote:VDT wrote:If you can get Paul for Horford+ pick(s) you do it. There is no risk really.
Of course there's risk in burning draft capital for a 6 foot 35 year old. Especially since that would make Thybulle the lone first round asset on our roster over a 4 draft span.
This team sucks. The draft is our only salvation. It should not be looked at as a source of disposable currency.
Yes you give something, but look what you get. If Horford doesnt play at all it means that we have 27 mil doing nothing. If he plays it is probably even worse because the team plays worse, unless you never pair him with Embiid which is unlikely. So just removing Horford from the roster and inserting someone useful like Paul will help us not only in the postseason (potentially) but in terms of increasing the value of our players and improving the team chemistry. I suspect this increase in the trade value of the players more than makes up for the lost pick.
Moreover look at the pick that we are giving. You can potentially get a pick in the late 20s with some second round picks and some money. If we need to have a first round pick we can trade for it most years. Hell, you can get a pick in the 30s for just money. Beyond that, what is the expected performance of a player drafted in the 20s during his rookie contract? I would say that on average you can get vet minimum guys as good or better than that. What you really lose is the upside of a pick which doesnt, most of the times, exist in veteran players.
Having said that, i doubt we get Paul, unless he wants to come here and forces Presti to trade him here. Other teams are more desperate and have better contracts to send along with the picks.