GhostsOfGil wrote:Kyle Weidie wrote an interesting piece over at TAI about the on/off #s from last season:
Found this quote interesting:
"And guess what: the draft pick isn’t the answer. It is almost certain to be traded, even if it’s just to trade down. …Grunfeld will believe it’s time to do something mildly desperate get desperately needed complementary scoring."
http://www.truthaboutit.net/2013/05/whe ... ds+Blog%29
The plan that I expect they’re going to unfurl before the adoring throngs is a continuation of last offseason’s MO: use the pick
and make a trade for a veteran, but at the expense of future salary flexibility.
Grunmeister wrote:On trading the draft pick to add more veterans: “We can get an old player any time, but if the old player doesn’t help you on the court. That’s not the kind of situation we want to get into.”
If the front office plans to keep Okafor or sign another well compensated vet, they're really going to paint themselves into a corner if they don't land a go getter on a rookie salary. It's painfully obvious that we can't afford two additional "old players" of any note, though we can probably get one without trading the pick. To me, that says that a trade down as Wiede mentioned is possible, but an outright trade out is a precarious premise (aside from someone still on a rookie deal or who we think takes us into contention, like Cousins or Horford).
That said, depending on what all's out there, it's by no means certain that a trade down that sacrifices the 8th is going to get a substantially superior player to what we would get by showing a willingness to take on some salary and throwing out peripheral assets, especially if we don't mind an old guy, which we apparently don't.