Official Trade Thread -- Part XL

[payitforward]

Zards -- OTOH, this...

I think the main point that Nate is making (which I agree with) is that, if you trade Beal, getting an all-star caliber player like Brown in exchange should be the goal. That would be preferable to getting 3-4 mid-first round draft picks...all of whom might turn out to be average players (or good role players) at best.

That’s just not correct.... plenty of mid first round and later picks have turned into “star” players.

...is just sloppy on nat's part. He's right that plenty of low picks become stars. But, the point is irrelevant. You trade something for something else of equal value. You know Brad's value; the market will offer you something in that range.

Who is suggesting to trade Brad for 3-4 mid-R1 picks? Where was that suggestion made?

[payitforward]

...plenty of mid first round and later picks have turned into “star” players.

Yes, but far more have not. The question isn't whether it's possible to land a major impact player in the middle of the first, but whether the odds of doing so (even given a couple of chances) are sufficiently in our favor to warrant passing up an already-proven player or higher-value asset (e.g. a single pick at the very top of the lottery) - they're not....

You're way too smart to take this uncritical position, glizzy.

There is no "already-proven player" in the draft -- not this year & not any year. There is a substantial chance of failure wherever you pick in the draft -- about 1/3 of the guys picked from #1 - #3 fail! & a higher % than that do not live up to their pick position.

If we look at guys taken from 4r down the success rate tumbles in a hurry. Of course there's an advantage to having a higher pick. Duh. & there's also an advantage to having multiple lower picks instead. Duh again. If both weren't the case, we'd never see draft day trades.

Statements like "I'd much rather have 1 high pick than multiple low picks" are meaningless in the abstract. The minute you add names of actual players taken in actual drafts, the preference vanishes. Because, of course, no one means they'd rather have the guy taken #2 in 2011 instead of the guys taken #15 & 30. In fact, no one says he'd rather have that #2 guy than the guy taken #60 that year!

Would you rather have had the #1 pick in 2018 or the #3 pick? The higher pick of course! Only problem is that you'd have taken DeAndre Ayton, whereas if you'd had the #3 pick you'd have taken Luka Doncic (but only b/c Ayton was gone!).

As far as "star" players, once you get past the 3d pick, there is little if any more likelihood that the guy you pick "at the top of the lottery" will become a star than somebody taken substantially lower.

Of course, if you know in advance just how good every draft prospect is going to be, why then the higher the pick the better -- yet... even in that case, if you alone know this, then you are still far better off trading down for multiple picks. Why? Because other GMs do NOT know this. Hence you are going to score with your multiple picks.

Wouldn't it have been great to have the #1 pick in 2012, the year the Wiz took Beal #3? Sure! you'd have gotten Anthony Davis!! How about to have the #2 pick & get Kidd-Gilchrist? The #4 & get Waiters? The #5 & get Thomas Robinson? You like those "high value assets?"

Thomas Robinson went #5 & was gone in a minute. Kyle O'Quinn went #49 & had a productive career. How much did you like Kendall Marshall? Austin Rivers? John Henson? Meyers Leonard? You like those "high value assets" better than Draymond Green? Will Barton? Khris Middleton? Tomas Satoransky? Jae Crowder?

Hell, were any of them better than Mike Scott? He went #46 I believe... let me check. No, he went #43. #46 was Darius Miller who was just waived last week after a journeyman career that lapped Thomas Robinson a few times!

In short, past the first 3 picks, getting a star means getting lucky. Period. & if you let me flip a coin 3 times I'll be more likely to come up with heads than you will flipping it 1 time.

[DCZards]

In short, past the first 3 picks, getting a star means getting lucky. Period. & if you let me flip a coin 3 times I'll be more likely to come up with heads than you will flipping it 1 time.

PIF, glizzy did say an "already-proven player or higher-value asset (e.g. a single pick at the very top of the lottery,") which sounds to me like he's clearly talking about a top 1, 2 or 3 pick. So I'm not quite sure where you disagree with him since, I believe, you also support the idea of not trading a top 3 pick for multiple picks in the middle of the first round.

Am I wrong about that? Or would you trade Beal for 2-3 mid-first round picks, which is what we were discussing?

P.S. I think you'd be surpised by how many of your fellow posters here know who Jonny Fllynn is.

[9 and 20]

Does there exist anywhere an actual accounting of the draft, something like an average of pts., rebounds, assists by the players at each position in the draft? So instead of pointing to individual examples of #7 picks and #15 picks, you could look at the average level of production of #7 or #15 over the past 20 years.

[9 and 20]

We are equating Jaylen Brown and Ben Simmons to a top 4 pick? Not me.

If I can't get a top 4 pick... Ben Simmons, Michael Porter Jr & Jaylen Brown plus additional assets become intriguing.

I'd rather have a known quantity than 7-8 shots at drafting one over a 8 yr span.

Adding Ben Simmons and Evan Mobley (fingers crossed for our own lottery pick) would make this team pretty good defensively, for the first time in a long time. Would have to figure out how to use Westbrook, but that could be a fun team to watch.

[payitforward]

1. glizzy is one of my favorite posters here (like you in that regard! ).

2. No one has ever suggested trading a #1-3 pick for 2-3 mid-R1 picks. Nor can I come up with a single example of that actually happening. I suggested that we trade our #9 pick in the 2019 draft for 2 mid-R1 picks. That would have been a very good idea. We actually know what we could have gotten. Now, in fairness, we didn't know that when I suggested such a trade. I just didn't see any reason not to do it. & I'd say the same based on what we now know about the players who went in that draft.

3. There are plenty of resources available to develop a sense of what picks at any spot in the draft are worth what other picks.
4. Of course, much depends on the actual particulars of a given draft. & what is meant by a "mid-R1 pick." Thus, would I have traded, say the #3 pick in 2019 for the #s 15, 16 & 17 that year? Do you mean instead of picking R.J. Barrett? Sure -- in a minute. But not the #2 pick! I would have taken Ja Morant over any set of 3 R1 picks after #2.

Has someone actually suggested trading Brad for 2-3 mid-R1 picks? If so, I missed it.

Trading a player for picks is completely different from trading a pick for other picks. Beal's value is a known thing. Very different from the value of a pick with a number attached to it.

In fact, unless it was done in secret & the dead of night, it would not be possible to trade Bradley Beal for 2 mid-R1 picks. That should be obvious.

If there was any sense that he was on the market, you would have better offers than that in every one of the phone calls you got.

[payitforward]

No one suggested trading Brad for 3-4 mid-R1 picks.

Nat said he'd rather do that than trade Brad for a guy who wasn't nearly as good & was making $20+m -- that's completely different.

In any case, what is the possible point? Isn't it obvious that if Bradley Beal were on the market the Wizards would get several competing offers. The market would give us a lot of value for him.

[payitforward]

Does there exist anywhere an actual accounting of the draft, something like an average of pts., rebounds, assists by the players at each position in the draft? So instead of pointing to individual examples of #7 picks and #15 picks, you could look at the average level of production of #7 or #15 over the past 20 years.

Since one can calculate productivity for any player -- with at least a reasonable degree of accuracy -- & since there aren't that many #7 or #15 picks, it would be trivial to work up those numbers.

However, they would be irrelevant.

No one in his right mind thinks that the average #15 pick is likely to be as good as the average #7 pick. Or, to put it slightly differently, who do you think would trade the #7 pick in any draft straight up for the #15 pick? Answer = no one. That's not the question.

[NatP4]

Zards -- OTOH, this...

I think the main point that Nate is making (which I agree with) is that, if you trade Beal, getting an all-star caliber player like Brown in exchange should be the goal. That would be preferable to getting 3-4 mid-first round draft picks...all of whom might turn out to be average players (or good role players) at best.

That’s just not correct.... plenty of mid first round and later picks have turned into “star” players.

...is just sloppy on nat's part. He's right that plenty of low picks become stars. But, the point is irrelevant. You trade something for something else of equal value. You know Brad's value; the market will offer you something in that range.

Who is suggesting to trade Brad for 3-4 mid-R1 picks? Where was that suggestion made?

There’s nothing sloppy about it. Zards made the statement that mid round picks turn out to be average players at best, which is not true at all whatsoever.

I guess I was the person that made the suggestion? I simply said that I would rather have 3 1st round picks in the 10-20 range than Jaylen Brown at 24 million.

[DCZards]

Zards -- OTOH, this...

That’s just not correct.... plenty of mid first round and later picks have turned into “star” players.

...is just sloppy on nat's part. He's right that plenty of low picks become stars. But, the point is irrelevant. You trade something for something else of equal value. You know Brad's value; the market will offer you something in that range.

Who is suggesting to trade Brad for 3-4 mid-R1 picks? Where was that suggestion made?

There’s nothing sloppy about it. Zards made the statement that mid round picks turn out to be average players at best, which is not true at all whatsoever.

I guess I was the person that made the suggestion? I simply said that I would rather have 3 1st round picks in the 10-20 range than Jaylen Brown at 24 million.

Just for clarification, that's not what I actually said. What I said is that the multiple mid-first round picks you would want to trade Beal for "might turn out to be average players (or good role players) at best."

I would never make the flat out statement that "mid round picks turn out to be average players at best. There is too much evidence (e.g. Giannis, Kawhi) to the contrary.

[payitforward]

Zards -- OTOH, this...

That’s just not correct.... plenty of mid first round and later picks have turned into “star” players.

...is just sloppy on nat's part. He's right that plenty of low picks become stars. But, the point is irrelevant. You trade something for something else of equal value. You know Brad's value; the market will offer you something in that range.

Who is suggesting to trade Brad for 3-4 mid-R1 picks? Where was that suggestion made?

There’s nothing sloppy about it. Zards made the statement that mid round picks turn out to be average players at best, which is not true at all whatsoever...,

No, that's not what Zards said. There's a big payback in life, Nat, for actually understanding the exact thing a person is saying.

I guess I was the person that made the suggestion? I simply said that I would rather have 3 1st round picks in the 10-20 range than Jaylen Brown at 24 million.

To each his own, Nat, but that makes little sense to me. Jaylen Brown is still a very young player -- he's about 18 months older than Rui Hachimura.

Now, if you had a certain set of players in mind that you could get for those picks, that might make sense. But, of course there's no guarantee that you get those guys, right?

[NatP4]

Any pick in the draft can turn out to be an average player. 6 out of the top 10 players selected in the 2020 draft look like busts. 7 out of the top 10 in 2019 look like busts. Jaylen Brown could walk in UFA in a few years, or get injured and retire.

You would obviously make any move like that with a plan in mind and a specific short list of players at each slot. You are trading your franchise superstar....

I have repeatedly mapped out my plan and named specific players at each slot, if I had 3-4 mid first round picks, why don’t you tell me exactly how this dumpster fire of a roster suddenly turns into a contender or even a 7/8 seed with Jaylen Brown instead of Bradley Beal????

I think the main point that Nate is making (which I agree with) is that, if you trade Beal, getting an all-star caliber player like Brown in exchange should be the goal. That would be preferable to getting 3-4 mid-first round draft picks...all of whom might turn out to be average players (or good role players) at best.

[9 and 20]

Turns out a few people have already done the work of determining average production at each draft pick. This site I thought did a good job - average over 40 years of the top 22 picks -http://paceandspacehoops.com/how-well-does-nba-draft-order-predict-player-careers/. You see blips down at pick 6 and up at pick 9, but the overall trend is, average production goes down, just like you would expect.

So, when you trade, for example, pick 7 for pick 15 and 20, or Beal for a bunch of #13-20 picks, I think you have to look at not just the instances of finding great players at those positions. Of course it is possible to draft a great player there, but on average, you don't. I'd rather have one really good player out of the draft.

[NatP4]

No one suggested trading Brad for 3-4 mid-R1 picks.

Nat said he'd rather do that than trade Brad for a guy who wasn't nearly as good & was making $20+m -- that's completely different.

In any case, what is the possible point? Isn't it obvious that if Bradley Beal were on the market the Wizards would get several competing offers. The market would give us a lot of value for him.

This is a fan board. None of this matters. The wizards are terrible. There’s not much to talk about.

Again, Jaylen Brown is 24 years old, under contract for a few more years at 24-28 million, then hits UFA. Ben Simmons is under contract forever and going to make an absurd 33-40 million a year.

I don’t care about historical context of draft slots. I obviously have players in mind for those picks. I’ll go on record for you and I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that I will end up right. Lets say you had the 10th, 15th, and 20th picks and we go off of Tankathon’s latest mock:

10: Franz Wagner
15: Jared Butler
20: Josh Giddey

And there are PLENTY of other good options at those spots.

Those combined 3 assets will be FAR more valuable than Jaylen Brown at or Ben Simmons in the future.

[SA37]

Does there exist anywhere an actual accounting of the draft, something like an average of pts., rebounds, assists by the players at each position in the draft? So instead of pointing to individual examples of #7 picks and #15 picks, you could look at the average level of production of #7 or #15 over the past 20 years.

Not that I know of, but to give you an idea, here's the All-NBA teams last year and where guys were drafted:

A Davis (1) - Giannis (15) - Doncic (3) - Harden (3) - LeBron (1)

Jokic (41) - Leonard (15) - Lillard (6) - Paul (4) - Siakam (27)

J Butler (30) - Gobert (27) - Simmons (1) - Tatum (3) - Westbrook (4)

From this year's All-Star game:

Beal (3) - Booker (14) - Conley (4) - A Davis (1) - Durant (2) - Embiid (3) - Harden (3) - Irving (1) - Lavine (13) - Leonard (15) - Mitchell (13) - J Randle (7) - Tatum (3) - Vucevic (16) - Zion (1)

Giannis (15) - J Brown (3) - Curry (7) - Doncic (3) - P George (10) - Gobert (27) - LeBron (1) - Jokic (41) - Lillard (6) - Paul (4) - Sabonis (11) - Simmons (1)


Some things worth considering:

Utah has the best record in the league this year and their main rotation guys are: Gobert (27), O'Neale (undrafted), Bogdanovic (31), Ingles (claimed off waivers), Mitchell (13), Conley (4), and Clarkson (46th)

Miami made the Finals last year and had these rotation guys: Adebayo (14), Crowder (34), Butler (30), Robinson (undrafted), Nunn (undrafted), Olynyk (13), Herro (13), Dragic (45), Iguodala (9)

Denver's best players are Jokic (41), Murray (7), and MPJ (14)

Golden St has built a dynasty around Curry (7), Thompson (11), and Green (35)

The Clippers have built around P George (10) and K Leonard (15)

The Bucks are built around Giannis (15), Middleton (39), Lopez (10), and Holiday (17)

Toronto won a championship built around Leonard (15), Siakam (27), K Lowry (24), VanVleet (undrafted), Ibaka (24), Green (46), and Gasol (48)

[wall_glizzy]

Some things worth considering:

Utah has the best record in the league this year and their main rotation guys are: Gobert (27), O'Neale (undrafted), Bogdanovic (31), Ingles (claimed off waivers), Mitchell (13), Conley (4), and Clarkson (46th)

Miami made the Finals last year and had these rotation guys: Adebayo (14), Crowder (34), Butler (30), Robinson (undrafted), Nunn (undrafted), Olynyk (13), Herro (13), Dragic (45), Iguodala (9)

Denver's best players are Jokic (41), Murray (7), and MPJ (14)

Golden St has built a dynasty around Curry (7), Thompson (11), and Green (35)

The Clippers have built around P George (10) and K Leonard (15)

The Bucks are built around Giannis (15), Middleton (39), Lopez (10), and Holiday (17)

Toronto won a championship built around Leonard (15), Siakam (27), K Lowry (24), VanVleet (undrafted), Ibaka (24), Green (46), and Gasol (48)

Ooh, do the defending champion Lakers next!

[SA37]

Some things worth considering:

Utah has the best record in the league this year and their main rotation guys are: Gobert (27), O'Neale (undrafted), Bogdanovic (31), Ingles (claimed off waivers), Mitchell (13), Conley (4), and Clarkson (46th)

Miami made the Finals last year and had these rotation guys: Adebayo (14), Crowder (34), Butler (30), Robinson (undrafted), Nunn (undrafted), Olynyk (13), Herro (13), Dragic (45), Iguodala (9)

Denver's best players are Jokic (41), Murray (7), and MPJ (14)

Golden St has built a dynasty around Curry (7), Thompson (11), and Green (35)

The Clippers have built around P George (10) and K Leonard (15)

The Bucks are built around Giannis (15), Middleton (39), Lopez (10), and Holiday (17)

Toronto won a championship built around Leonard (15), Siakam (27), K Lowry (24), VanVleet (undrafted), Ibaka (24), Green (46), and Gasol (48)

Ooh, do the defending champion Lakers next!

I know you're trying to be a smart little cookie, but I'll do Washington to show you having top picks isn't always magic:

1994-1995 Washington: Chapman (8), Cheaney (6), Duckworth (33), Gugliotta (6), Howard (5), Webber (1), Walker (5)

Record? 21-61

95-96: Cheaney (6), Howard (5), Webber (1), R Wallace (4)

Record 39-43

2001-2002 Wizards: Jordan (3), Brown (1), Laettner (3) , Hamilton (7), Thomas (12), Alexander (13)

record? 37-45

2002-2003 Wizards: Jordan (3), Brown (1), Laettner (3), Dixon (17), Hughes (8), Stackhouse (3), Jeffries (11)

Record? 37-45


Examples like the ones above are endless. Just go look at the Clippers, Bulls post Jordan, the Knicks the past 20 years...

[Ruzious]

1994-1995 Washington: Chapman (8), Cheaney (6), Duckworth (33), Gugliotta (6), Howard (5), Webber (1), Walker (5)

Record? 21-61

Hmm, didn't the Bullets get Webber by trading Gugliotta?

[SA37]

1994-1995 Washington: Chapman (8), Cheaney (6), Duckworth (33), Gugliotta (6), Howard (5), Webber (1), Walker (5)

Record? 21-61

Hmm, didn't the Bullets get Webber by trading Gugliotta?

You are correct. Both of their names appeared on the roster so I thought they both had played the season for the Wizards.

[nate33]

Does there exist anywhere an actual accounting of the draft, something like an average of pts., rebounds, assists by the players at each position in the draft? So instead of pointing to individual examples of #7 picks and #15 picks, you could look at the average level of production of #7 or #15 over the past 20 years.

Not that I know of, but to give you an idea, here's the All-NBA teams last year and where guys were drafted:

A Davis (1) - Giannis (15) - Doncic (3) - Harden (3) - LeBron (1)

Jokic (41) - Leonard (15) - Lillard (6) - Paul (4) - Siakam (27)

J Butler (30) - Gobert (27) - Simmons (1) - Tatum (3) - Westbrook (4)

From this year's All-Star game:

Beal (3) - Booker (14) - Conley (4) - A Davis (1) - Durant (2) - Embiid (3) - Harden (3) - Irving (1) - Lavine (13) - Leonard (15) - Mitchell (13) - J Randle (7) - Tatum (3) - Vucevic (16) - Zion (1)

Giannis (15) - J Brown (3) - Curry (7) - Doncic (3) - P George (10) - Gobert (27) - LeBron (1) - Jokic (41) - Lillard (6) - Paul (4) - Sabonis (11) - Simmons (1)


Some things worth considering:

Utah has the best record in the league this year and their main rotation guys are: Gobert (27), O'Neale (undrafted), Bogdanovic (31), Ingles (claimed off waivers), Mitchell (13), Conley (4), and Clarkson (46th)

Miami made the Finals last year and had these rotation guys: Adebayo (14), Crowder (34), Butler (30), Robinson (undrafted), Nunn (undrafted), Olynyk (13), Herro (13), Dragic (45), Iguodala (9)

Denver's best players are Jokic (41), Murray (7), and MPJ (14)

Golden St has built a dynasty around Curry (7), Thompson (11), and Green (35)

The Clippers have built around P George (10) and K Leonard (15)

The Bucks are built around Giannis (15), Middleton (39), Lopez (10), and Holiday (17)

Toronto won a championship built around Leonard (15), Siakam (27), K Lowry (24), VanVleet (undrafted), Ibaka (24), Green (46), and Gasol (48)

Good stuff, but there's a bit of chicken and egg thing with those championship teams. It's not that it's just as easy to build with low picks as it is with high picks, it's that the single most important thing you can do to build a championship roster is to get really lucky and find an All-NBA caliber player with a late pick.

This is because, by picking late, you are already a good team in the first place and you are adding All-NBA talent to an existing good team. Also, late picks are really cheap salary-wise, so you are likely to have an opportunity to sign another All-Star caliber talent via free agency.

The 6 best picks in the last 10 years relative to draft position were Giannis, Jokic, Gobert, Draymond, Kawhi and Butler. All but Butler either won a championship with the team that drafted them or are current contenders with the team that drafted them.

Unfortunately, I don't really think there is a strategy to getting lucky with late picks. There's maybe one non-lotto future All-NBA player in every other draft. So there's about a 2% chance that you pick it. Even if you trade lotto picks for multiple late picks, I don't think you are increasing your odds much. Better to pick in the top 5 where you have a roughly 15% of landing an All-NBA player.