Ben Simmons trades go here (and here only): Expect warnings if not following forum rules

[toooskies]

Embiid literally signed his extension last month. He's not demanding a trade this year with Simmons' situation clearly in a bad place when he signed it. And honestly after seeing what Simmons has done, he's not going to do the same thing to the team.

Last month, Morey was still trying to get Lillard and Beal

Last month, there was still some hope that Simmons could be convinced to join the Sixers.

We are now on Option 3 - get what you can or wait. That’s what happened. I don’t think that can be overlooked in Embiid’s thinking, nor do I believe that losing games you’d normally win, with a $32 mil hole for zero production, will have no effect.

I have not said Embiid will demand a trade tomorrow. I have said that it’s a possibility, and I asked how long Bully thought Simmons would wait,p.

Last month, there were no offers in the ballpark of Morey's reported demands and there was no reason to believe offers would increase. This is also certainly the case after most of free agency had been settled. Also no reason to believe Beal or Lillard would ask out anytime soon. Embiid probably could've called them and asked if that was coming.

Also no reason to believe Simmons would have given any kind of effort beyond a Harden-esque check collection. His agent was floating trades to the front office the week after the season ended. Again, Embiid probably knows more about how likely Simmons is to come back than any of us, but it's never looked like a realistic outcome since June that Simmons was going to come back.

Point being-- if you're Embiid, you don't sign the extension until you find out what happens with the very uncertain Simmons situation unless it doesn't impact your near-term commitments to the team.

[Roy The Natural]

This is the first time I’ve ever heard you or Bully call your own positions a “narrative.” You both use the word to insult opposing views, and it seems hypocritical to me while you are pushing your own narrative.

I have never said that anyone has to accept Windhorst’s opinion as gospel. But he has access to insiders and front office personnel that you and I do not. Over the last few months, I have seen a constant refusal to put any weight into evidence from actual sources that disagree with your own narrative, and instead, you’ve created your own evidence to back up your opinion (You said Morey has been offering reasonable counteroffers for months when all of the national media says that is untrue). Windhorst and Quick aren’t gospel, but you shouldn’t stick your fingers in your ears if you are trying to find a reasonable position.

Finally, stop bringing over disagreements over from other threads - what KAT does or doesn’t do has nothing to do with what Embiid does.

Frustratingly true in bold here.

If you think Chuck or I are relying on an unfounded narrative then call us out and say so. But you're not going to stop us from expressing our opinions in the process. And if someone disagreeing with you is so frustrating then post elsewhere. You won't be missed.

I don't think that your "narratives" are necessarily unfounded. I think that the word "narrative" has been used consistently as a bludgeon in which certain posters use to beat down opinions in which they don't agree with. The whole Ben Simmons giant never-ending thread has been a disaster for a long time now.

Objective evidence posts are routinely ignored. Words are CONSTANTLY misconstrued; most likely purposefully a large portion of the time. Dismissive posts are made by a myriad of posters who lambast others for their subjective opinions and valuations while providing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING of value in their own posts with which to retort... outside.. wait for it.... their own freaking narrative.

I've regularly provided objective evidence in my posts... and somehow still fall under the "narrative" notion of certain posters here. Like I said... frustratingly true. On another note... I doubt very much then any specific poster on this trade forum would be missed much, including you and Chuck.

I understand very much that many of these "narratives" are frustrating and illogical. Both sides of the isle of Ben Simmons is garbage/great have many narratives that they've built up in their head to convince themselves that they're right and the other side is full of fools.

I don't agree that the 76ers should move Ben Simmons for junk (though there are many debates on what junk is/isn't, which should be had earnestly, not dismissively). I don't agree that Embiid is going to ask out (unless this isn't resolved by next offseason). I don't agree that the 76ers need to be hasty. I don't agree that Ben Simmons is going to cave. I don't agree that Ben Simmons value is tanked because of one play, it's because of a large sample size of games, and a lack of general progression as a player. I don't agree that Ben Simmons can be the centerpiece of a Beal or Lillard trade without getting back on the court and improving his value again.... I could go on and on.

I have many nuances to my views and opinions regarding Ben Simmons. However, I'm sure I'm just a narrative pusher.

[BullyKing]

Frustratingly true in bold here.

If you think Chuck or I are relying on an unfounded narrative then call us out and say so. But you're not going to stop us from expressing our opinions in the process. And if someone disagreeing with you is so frustrating then post elsewhere. You won't be missed.

I don't think that your "narratives" are necessarily unfounded. I think that the word "narrative" has been used consistently as a bludgeon in which certain posters use to beat down opinions in which they don't agree with. The whole Ben Simmons giant never-ending thread has been a disaster for a long time now.

Objective evidence posts are routinely ignored. Words are CONSTANTLY misconstrued; most likely purposefully a large portion of the time. Dismissive posts are made by a myriad of posters who lambast others for their subjective opinions and valuations while providing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING of value in their own posts with which to retort... outside.. wait for it.... their own freaking narrative.

I've regularly provided objective evidence in my posts... and somehow still fall under the "narrative" notion of certain posters here. Like I said... frustratingly true. On another note... I doubt very much then any specific poster on this trade forum would be missed much, including you and Chuck.

Either you are confused or you do not know what a narrative is. Someone dismissing subjective opinions like I think CJ is worth more than Ben is one thing. That's not a narrative. Saying I think CJ is worth more than Ben because Embiid will demand a trade if this isn't resolved soon - that's a narrative.

And for the record, you're all bent of shape over a discussion that wasn't directed at you and which did not prohibit the use of narratives but merely explained why opinions based on narratives without evidence are not compelling to Chuck and others. So I'm not actually sure what your issue is unless it's simply feeling like no one should be allowed to disagree with you or that you don't feel like your posts receive the attention and adulation to which you feel they are entitled.

[Krapinsky]

Thought I'd test out a trade I've been tinkering with here.

MN out: Prince (exp.), Beasley, Layman (exp.), 2022 FRP, 2024 FRP, 2023 pick swap. The protections on the picks, if any, can be debated but for now I am leaving out.

MN in: Simmons

Why? MN covets Simmons and doesn't have to sell the farm.

DET out: Grant
DET in: Beasley, Layman, 2024 MN FRP

Why? Detroit adds shooting to pair with Cunningham. Get's a nice pick for perceivable downgrade from Grant to Beasley.

PHI out: Simmons, Curry
PHI in: Prince, McCollum, MN 2022 FRP

Why? Philadelphia gets a playmaker to replace Simmons, plus a first rounder to make up difference in value. A Prince-Curry swap helps balance the roster.

POR out: McCollum
POR in: Grant, Curry, 2023 MN Pick swap

Why? POR doesn't like the Simmons fit with Lillard since both need the ball in their hands to be effective. Grant helps give them a different look with more size for next season. Curry helps replace McCollum's shooting/scoring punch.

[BullyKing]

Frustratingly true in bold here.

If you think Chuck or I are relying on an unfounded narrative then call us out and say so. But you're not going to stop us from expressing our opinions in the process. And if someone disagreeing with you is so frustrating then post elsewhere. You won't be missed.

I understand very much that many of these "narratives" are frustrating and illogical. Both sides of the isle of Ben Simmons is garbage/great have many narratives that they've built up in their head to convince themselves that they're right and the other side is full of fools.

I don't agree that the 76ers should move Ben Simmons for junk (though there are many debates on what junk is/isn't, which should be had earnestly, not dismissively). I don't agree that Embiid is going to ask out (unless this isn't resolved by next offseason). I don't agree that the 76ers need to be hasty. I don't agree that Ben Simmons is going to cave. I don't agree that Ben Simmons value is tanked because of one play, it's because of a large sample size of games, and a lack of general progression as a player. I don't agree that Ben Simmons can be the centerpiece of a Beal or Lillard trade without getting back on the court and improving his value again.... I could go on and on.

I have many nuances to my views and opinions regarding Ben Simmons. However, I'm sure I'm just a narrative pusher.

Now responding to the part you added: When have I ever accused you of being a narrative pusher? Like this is what is frustrating to me. This has nothing to do with you and you went in and added yourself among the victims for reasons I don't understand.

[shrink]

If you think Chuck or I are relying on an unfounded narrative then call us out and say so. But you're not going to stop us from expressing our opinions in the process. And if someone disagreeing with you is so frustrating then post elsewhere. You won't be missed.

Ah, the motto of every successful moderator.

Look, you, me, Roy, Chuck .. we’ve all been here for a long time and we all love the forum. But we all have to admit, and accept responsibility, that these Simmons threads have been RealGM at it’s worst. People are welcome to have whatever opinion they want about Simmons. But we need a place where those opinions can be discussed honestly and respectfully. There can’t be one set of rules for posters and a different set for mods. Posts should be about debating the positions, the evidence, not attacking the posters.

This isn’t rocket science. I hope we can all make an effort to get this thread back on track.

[BullyKing]

Thought I'd test out a trade I've been tinkering with here.

MN out: Prince (exp.), Beasley, Layman (exp.), 2022 FRP, 2024 FRP, 2023 pick swap. The protections on the picks, if any, can be debated but for now I am leaving out.

MN in: Simmons

Why? MN covets Simmons and doesn't have to sell the farm.

DET out: Grant
DET in: Beasley, Layman, 2024 MN FRP

Why? Detroit adds shooting to pair with Cunningham. Get's a nice pick for perceivable downgrade from Grant to Beasley.

PHI out: Simmons, Curry
PHI in: Prince, McCollum, MN 2022 FRP

Why? Philadelphia gets a playmaker to replace Simmons, plus a first rounder to make up difference in value. A Prince-Curry swap helps balance the roster.

POR out: McCollum
POR in: Grant, Curry, 2023 MN Pick swap

Why? POR doesn't like the Simmons fit with Lillard since both need the ball in their hands to be effective. Grant helps give them a different look with more size for next season. Curry helps replace McCollum's shooting/scoring punch.

I've commented enough on Simmons for McCollum so I'll skip over whether a single first is sufficient in my view to bridge the gap. What I don't understand is: (1) sure Prince for Curry balances the roster slightly but the value is just so incredibly off. Since I've been told that the league is all about shooting, surely this is a way to turn one of the league's best shooters on a bargain contract into a better positional fit without lighting fire to so much excess value; (2) Detroit is getting creamed here in my opinion. I think we all went a little overboard on Grant's value when he came out hot last year but this is just way too low for me; and (3) I don't have McCollum worth Grant. I don't even know if I have McCollum worth Curry once you factor in 3X salary difference. I definitely don't have McCollum as worth Grant, Curry and a pick swap.

[Roy The Natural]

If you think Chuck or I are relying on an unfounded narrative then call us out and say so. But you're not going to stop us from expressing our opinions in the process. And if someone disagreeing with you is so frustrating then post elsewhere. You won't be missed.

I don't think that your "narratives" are necessarily unfounded. I think that the word "narrative" has been used consistently as a bludgeon in which certain posters use to beat down opinions in which they don't agree with. The whole Ben Simmons giant never-ending thread has been a disaster for a long time now.

Objective evidence posts are routinely ignored. Words are CONSTANTLY misconstrued; most likely purposefully a large portion of the time. Dismissive posts are made by a myriad of posters who lambast others for their subjective opinions and valuations while providing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING of value in their own posts with which to retort... outside.. wait for it.... their own freaking narrative.

I've regularly provided objective evidence in my posts... and somehow still fall under the "narrative" notion of certain posters here. Like I said... frustratingly true. On another note... I doubt very much then any specific poster on this trade forum would be missed much, including you and Chuck.

Either you are confused or you do not know what a narrative is. Someone dismissing subjective opinions like I think CJ is worth more than Ben is one thing. That's not a narrative. Saying I think CJ is worth more than Ben because Embiid will demand a trade if this isn't resolved soon - that's a narrative.

And for the record, you're all bent of shape over a discussion that wasn't directed at you and which did not prohibit the use of narratives but merely explained why opinions based on narratives without evidence are not compelling to Chuck and others. So I'm not actually sure what your issue is unless it's simply feeling like no one should be allowed to disagree with you or that you don't feel like your posts receive the attention and adulation to which you feel they are entitled.

For the record, it has been routinely stated by certain posters that my evaluation of players is part of some illuminati-type narrative that I'm trying to concoct.

For the record, you're all bent out of shape because I liked a post and bolded part of it that was calling out the hypocrisy of certain posters on this forum who concoct their own narratives about other posters motivations and methods of evaluating value regularly and use that to fight the narrative's which they don't agree with.

I think disagreement is the bedrock of this forum. I would love to get well thought out disagreements with my views. However, disagreements coming from certain posters are often not much more than thinly veiled ad-hominem.

I will digress though. No need for a bicker-fest here.

Someone in this thread needs to start providing some interesting data driven discussion. Right now, it's just a lot of he-said, she-said... will they, or won't they type of unfounded speculation.

[BullyKing]

If you think Chuck or I are relying on an unfounded narrative then call us out and say so. But you're not going to stop us from expressing our opinions in the process. And if someone disagreeing with you is so frustrating then post elsewhere. You won't be missed.

Ah, the motto of every successful moderator.

Look, you, me, Roy, Chuck .. we’ve all been here for a long time and we all love the forum. But we all have to admit, and accept responsibility, that these Simmons threads have been RealGM at it’s worst. People are welcome to have whatever opinion they want about Simmons. But we need a place where those opinions can be discussed honestly and respectfully. There can’t be one set of rules for posters and a different set for mods. Posts should be about debating the positions, the evidence, not attacking the posters.

This isn’t rocket science. I hope we can all make an effort to get this thread back on track.

It is you who is trying to set up a separate standard as has been explained to you and ignored by you other than to claim it is unfair for someone to put out inconsistencies in your position between two different threads as if each thread is its own separate universe.

That said, I agree these threads have been a trainwreck.

[HartfordWhalers]

Ah, the motto of every successful moderator.

Take a time out.

[HartfordWhalers]

The mods have given a lot of rope but I'm happy to get back to giving out official warnings and playing the heavy if the same posters skirt the same rules over and over again.

If you want to disagree with someone, feel free. If you want to argue any position at all, feel free. If you expect any position at all to not be questioned, then that won't work; posters and mods will push back on what seems unreasonable to them.

You all know the routine of what you should be doing, follow it.

[BullyKing]

I don't think that your "narratives" are necessarily unfounded. I think that the word "narrative" has been used consistently as a bludgeon in which certain posters use to beat down opinions in which they don't agree with. The whole Ben Simmons giant never-ending thread has been a disaster for a long time now.

Objective evidence posts are routinely ignored. Words are CONSTANTLY misconstrued; most likely purposefully a large portion of the time. Dismissive posts are made by a myriad of posters who lambast others for their subjective opinions and valuations while providing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING of value in their own posts with which to retort... outside.. wait for it.... their own freaking narrative.

I've regularly provided objective evidence in my posts... and somehow still fall under the "narrative" notion of certain posters here. Like I said... frustratingly true. On another note... I doubt very much then any specific poster on this trade forum would be missed much, including you and Chuck.

Either you are confused or you do not know what a narrative is. Someone dismissing subjective opinions like I think CJ is worth more than Ben is one thing. That's not a narrative. Saying I think CJ is worth more than Ben because Embiid will demand a trade if this isn't resolved soon - that's a narrative.

And for the record, you're all bent of shape over a discussion that wasn't directed at you and which did not prohibit the use of narratives but merely explained why opinions based on narratives without evidence are not compelling to Chuck and others. So I'm not actually sure what your issue is unless it's simply feeling like no one should be allowed to disagree with you or that you don't feel like your posts receive the attention and adulation to which you feel they are entitled.

For the record, it has been routinely stated by certain posters that my evaluation of players is part of some illuminati-type narrative that I'm trying to concoct.

For the record, you're all bent out of shape because I liked a post and bolded part of it that was calling out the hypocrisy of certain posters on this forum who concoct their own narratives about other posters motivations and methods of evaluating value regularly and use that to fight the narrative's which they don't agree with.

I think disagreement is the bedrock of this forum. I would love to get well thought out disagreements with my views. However, disagreements coming from certain posters are often not much more than thinly veiled ad-hominem.

"Certain posters" "certain posters" and "certain posters." I'm the certain poster that you called out but I'm not the certain poster that has accused you of anything. So I remain confused what you are arguing about if it's not that everyone needs to agree with your opinions or satisfy some unstated expectation of what an acceptable response is.

[BullyKing]

I'm stepping back now and accepting my share of the responsibility for escalating this. But if someone feels that I am using a narrative to support my opinion, I encourage them to rightfully call me out. I have no more interest in pushing my own unwarranted or subconscious narrative than I do crediting opinions of others predicated on a similarly flimsy foundation.

[Texas Chuck]

There can’t be one set of rules for posters and a different set for mods.

I'm so over this whole thing right now. But I want to address this because I understand the frustration it causes posters(and posters who also volunteer as Mods).

Yes there are different rules. And will continue to be different rules. Moderators are nothing more than posters who volunteer their time to help by merging and locking and moving threads. By enforcing a few minor policies regarding quality of posts. By helping to steer threads back in a different direction.

So it can be appropriate for a Moderator to make a post that would be inappropriate for another mod. Because of our function. It is okay for a Mod to lock a thread and say why and not appropriate for another poster to post lock this thread instead of reporting it.

And the kind of public personal comments that get directed to mods(read: Texas Chuck mostly) would never be tolerated if they were directed towards another poster. But we let an absolute ton of stuff go with no warnings, no timeouts etc when they are directed at us that would never be accepted towards another poster.

Now does that mean that Mods never make inappropriate posts? Of course not. I've made bad posts. I caught a warning for one literally just last week. I've publicly apologized on this board before including itt this morning. Have the other trade board mods had to remind me to watch my tone or even edit my posts? Yes.

But the board mods are like every other poster. We have a history, good and bad. And typically we aren't made mods if its mostly bad. And just like any other regs, yeah we get the benefit of the doubt from the other mods at times. Just like every other poster on this board has.

It's not usually hypocrisy. It's simply being human. If your expectation is that mods are perfect, I'll resign and you can see if you can find that person, but I'll tell you that's not realistic. Except for Mamba. Mamba might be perfect.

[jbk1234]

One thought that occurred to me is that the mere threat of trading Sexton to Philly has given Altman some leverage in extension talks. If Sexton is traded to Philly, Morey won't be extending him before the deadline. He'll want to see if Beal or Dame ask out midseason.

[Krapinsky]

Thought I'd test out a trade I've been tinkering with here.

MN out: Prince (exp.), Beasley, Layman (exp.), 2022 FRP, 2024 FRP, 2023 pick swap. The protections on the picks, if any, can be debated but for now I am leaving out.

MN in: Simmons

Why? MN covets Simmons and doesn't have to sell the farm.

DET out: Grant
DET in: Beasley, Layman, 2024 MN FRP

Why? Detroit adds shooting to pair with Cunningham. Get's a nice pick for perceivable downgrade from Grant to Beasley.

PHI out: Simmons, Curry
PHI in: Prince, McCollum, MN 2022 FRP

Why? Philadelphia gets a playmaker to replace Simmons, plus a first rounder to make up difference in value. A Prince-Curry swap helps balance the roster.

POR out: McCollum
POR in: Grant, Curry, 2023 MN Pick swap

Why? POR doesn't like the Simmons fit with Lillard since both need the ball in their hands to be effective. Grant helps give them a different look with more size for next season. Curry helps replace McCollum's shooting/scoring punch.

I've commented enough on Simmons for McCollum so I'll skip over whether a single first is sufficient in my view to bridge the gap. What I don't understand is: (1) sure Prince for Curry balances the roster slightly but the value is just so incredibly off. Since I've been told that the league is all about shooting, surely this is a way to turn one of the league's best shooters on a bargain contract into a better positional fit without lighting fire to so much excess value; (2) Detroit is getting creamed here in my opinion. I think we all went a little overboard on Grant's value when he came out hot last year but this is just way too low for me; and (3) I don't have McCollum worth Grant. I don't even know if I have McCollum worth Curry once you factor in 3X salary difference. I definitely don't have McCollum as worth Grant, Curry and a pick swap.

Appreciate the feedback. It seems you have a much lower view of McCollum and a higher view of Grant than I do. We can agree to disagree on those specific players. What I don't follow is how Curry's shooting get's a premium in your view, but McCollum's and Beasley's shooting does not. Prince also a capable 40% 3pt shooter by the way.

I would rank the players in the trade this way: Simmons >> McCollum > Grant > Beasley >> Curry > Prince >> Layman

Perhaps the pick swap gets moved from going to POR to PHI.

[Roy The Natural]

Either you are confused or you do not know what a narrative is. Someone dismissing subjective opinions like I think CJ is worth more than Ben is one thing. That's not a narrative. Saying I think CJ is worth more than Ben because Embiid will demand a trade if this isn't resolved soon - that's a narrative.

And for the record, you're all bent of shape over a discussion that wasn't directed at you and which did not prohibit the use of narratives but merely explained why opinions based on narratives without evidence are not compelling to Chuck and others. So I'm not actually sure what your issue is unless it's simply feeling like no one should be allowed to disagree with you or that you don't feel like your posts receive the attention and adulation to which you feel they are entitled.

For the record, it has been routinely stated by certain posters that my evaluation of players is part of some illuminati-type narrative that I'm trying to concoct.

For the record, you're all bent out of shape because I liked a post and bolded part of it that was calling out the hypocrisy of certain posters on this forum who concoct their own narratives about other posters motivations and methods of evaluating value regularly and use that to fight the narrative's which they don't agree with.

I think disagreement is the bedrock of this forum. I would love to get well thought out disagreements with my views. However, disagreements coming from certain posters are often not much more than thinly veiled ad-hominem.

"Certain posters" "certain posters" and "certain posters." I'm the certain poster that you called out but I'm not the certain poster that has accused you of anything. So I remain confused what you are arguing about if it's not that everyone needs to agree with your opinions or satisfy some unstated expectation of what an acceptable response is.

I'm actually not calling you out. You aren't one of the "certain posters"... so don't worry about it.

On to a more fruitful discussion.

What exactly is Ben Simmons' value? On impact alone I'm not even sure he's the player that many think he is.

Depending on how you categorize him positionally he's either the 17th ranked PG by RAPTOR, or the 15th ranked SF. By PIPM (LEBRON) he's ranked as the 12th most impactful PG. ESPN's RPM has him at the 7 spot among point guards.

By counting stats he's closer to prime Batum than he is to a true star. I get he's 25 years old but his impact has been pretty stable over the past 2 years at the range he's at now. He hasn't shown much progression offensively and I'm not sure there is much more untapped potential defensively for him.

I'm not sure why even when happy and engaged he should be valued much above fringe all-star. Now with everything that's going on, you've got to imagine it's on the lower end of the fringe all-star curve. In all honesty, that seems to be where many of the "rumored" packages have pegged his value. It's inline with low-end fringe all-star. I'm not sure how much more the 76ers expect they'll get? His impact metrics don't grade him out to a top 20 player in the league, and that's without the drama. Now I don't think neutral/negative impact players is what the 76ers should look for... eg DLo & Heild type deals.

However, I just can't see how Simmons could net other fringe all-star guys plus a vault of assets.

In the end, it seems as if a bunch of picks, or a similar impact player + some small stuff is going to be the answer. I agree with many Philly fans though that right now, there's no need for Philly to panic.

However, there is some inherent risk there. Once the season starts, Philly is relying on a panic move from opposing teams to a slow start. But what happens if Philly starts slow and a guy like Embiid maybe doesn't threaten he'll leave, but starts publicly voicing frustration with the situation?

In the end, it's hard to truly know what's even on the table right now... so it's hard to judge anything.

[Texas Chuck]

I would rank the players in the trade this way: Simmons >> McCollum > Grant > Beasley >> Curry > Prince >> Layman
.

Quick clarification question--is this how you rank them on-court or trade value? CJ is definitely a better player than Curry and Beasley might be though I think that's closer. But when you factor in Curry making barely 1/4 of what CJ makes and Beasley's off-court issues I think Curry has more trade value than Beasley and possibly CJ and Grant too.

[Krapinsky]

I would rank the players in the trade this way: Simmons >> McCollum > Grant > Beasley >> Curry > Prince >> Layman
.

Quick clarification question--is this how you rank them on-court or trade value? CJ is definitely a better player than Curry and Beasley might be though I think that's closer. But when you factor in Curry making barely 1/4 of what CJ makes and Beasley's off-court issues I think Curry has more trade value than Beasley and possibly CJ and Grant too.

This is how I would rate the trade value.

Candidly, I don't understand the Curry love. Curry was just traded for Josh Richardson and a 2nd round pick a year ago. I don't see how his one year in Philadelphia at age 31 has improved his trade value by that much. He actually played worse last year than his last season in Dallas. His TS% went from .643 to .607 and his PER went from 15.5 to 12.9.

[Texas Chuck]

This is how I would rate the trade value.

Candidly, I don't understand the Curry love. Curry was just traded for Josh Richardson and a 2nd round pick a year ago. I don't see how his one year in Philadelphia at age 31 has improved his trade value by that much. He actually played worse last year than his last season in Dallas. His TS% went from .643 to .607 and his PER went from 15.5 to 12.9.

Thanks!

I think for me its two things regarding Curry:

1. I think its a correction on his trade value. I think he was undervalued when Dallas traded him(note: I didn't think this at the time, but that was as much about Richardson as anything.). Curry has played two years mostly as a starter for good teams and performed at a high level in the playoffs. He's one of the best shooters in the world and his contract is 2/$16M. That's a great value.

2. I think CJ and Grant and Beasley aren't particularly valuable as trade pieces. CJ and Grant are quite good players. But both are making top of market money meaning there isn't really a lot of excess value there. And I think Beasley's value is going to continue to be deflated by his off-court issues. Some teams aren't likely to be willing to touch him at all and as you reduce destinations you reduce value.